Church of God News

This unsigned statement is a confession that Christians are persecuted by Arab Islamic governments and think adopting a dhimmi Church attitude gives protection.

Our native Aramaic Christian community in Israel enjoys freedom and protection while holding true to who we are.… pic.twitter.com/0jHDNm8jKL

— Shadi khalloul שאדי ח’לול (@shadikhalloul) January 18, 2026

COGwriter

Israel365 News posted the following:

Catholic Church condemns Christian Zionism as “damaging ideology” that threatens Church unity

January 19, 2026

The Catholic Church and its allied denominations in Jerusalem just declared war on Christian Zionism. In a statement released January 17, the Patriarchs and Heads of Churches in the Holy Land—led by the Roman Catholic hierarchy along with Eastern Catholic, Orthodox, and other traditional church leaders—condemned Christian support for Israel as a “damaging ideology” that misleads the public and harms Christian unity. The statement represents the Catholic Church’s most direct assault yet on the millions of evangelical Christians whose biblical interpretation leads them to support the Jewish state.

The Catholic-led coalition opened with a bold assertion of ecclesiastical authority: “The Patriarchs and Heads of Churches in the Holy Land affirm before the faithful and before the world that the flock of Christ in this land is entrusted to the Apostolic Churches, which have borne their sacred ministry across centuries with steadfast devotion.”

Then came the condemnation: “Recent activities undertaken by local individuals who advance damaging ideologies, such as Christian Zionism, mislead the public, sow confusion, and harm the unity of our flock. These undertakings have found favor among certain political actors in Israel and beyond who seek to push a political agenda which may harm the Christian presence in the Holy Land and the wider Middle East.”

The statement invoked New Testament authority to attack Christian Zionists: “Holy Scripture teaches us that ‘we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another’ (Romans 12:5). To claim authority outside the communion of the Church is to wound the unity of the faithful and burden the pastoral mission entrusted to the historic churches in the very land where our Lord lived, taught, suffered, and rose from the dead.”

The Catholic-led coalition then accused Israel of interference: “The Patriarchs and Heads of Churches further note with concern that these individuals have been welcomed at official levels both locally and internationally. Such actions constitute interference in the internal life of the churches and disregard the pastoral responsibility vested in the Patriarchs and Heads of Churches in Jerusalem.”

Their territorial claim was unambiguous: “The Patriarchs and Heads of Churches in Jerusalem reiterate that they alone represent the Churches and their flock in matters pertaining to Christian religious, communal, and pastoral life in the Holy Land.” …

The Bible speaks directly to this issue: “And I will bless them that bless thee, and him that curseth thee will I curse; and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed” (Genesis 12:3). The Catholic hierarchy is demanding that Israel reject those who bless her and grant exclusive recognition to institutions whose theological foundation for centuries was that the Church replaced Israel in God’s plan. https://israel365news.com/415473/catholic-church-condemns-christian-zionism-as-damaging-ideology-that-threatens-church-unity/

The statements from the so-called Patriarchs and their supporters look to be a prelude for persecution.

Before going further, let me add that there are different beliefs called ‘Christian Zionism.’ Several of which are not biblically-defensible, particularly with how some view the Palestinians.

But those aside, it is appropriate for Christians to do the following which the Bible enjoins:

1 Now the Lord had said to Abram:

“Get out of your country,
From your family
And from your father’s house,
To a land that I will show you.
2 I will make you a great nation;
I will bless you
And make your name great;
And you shall be a blessing.
3 I will bless those who bless you,
And I will curse him who curses you;
And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”  (Genesis 12:1-3)

6 Pray for the peace of Jerusalem:
“May they prosper who love you. (Psalms 122:6)

Furthermore, note that Jesus and His half-brother James taught that it was important to reach the descendants of Abraham’s grandson Jacob/Israel (who had 12 sons, hence 12 tribes):

5 “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter a city of the Samaritans. 6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7 And as you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ (Matthew 10:5-7)

24 … He answered and said, “I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 15:24)

1  James, a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad: Greetings. (James 1:1)

More on how and where the twelve tribes scattered abroad went is in our free eBook: Lost Tribes and Prophecies: What will happen to Australia, the British Isles, Canada, Europe, New Zealand and the United States of America?

That said, there are two other main points to bring out related to the claims of those considered to be Patriarchs of Jerusalem.

The first is that they do NOT have apostolic succession.

The Catholic Encyclopedia of 1907 notes:

The shortest-lived Apostolic Church is that of Jerusalem. In 130 the Holy City was destroyed by Hadrian, and a new town, Ælia Capitolina, erected on its site (Wilhelm J. Transcribed by Donald J. Boon. Apostolic Succession. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume I. Copyright © 1907 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, March 1, 1907. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

And while is now believed that Ælia Capitolina was finally erected in 135 (as opposed to 130 since the Bar Kaba revolt was from 132-135 A.D.), as the true Christians had to flee from Jerusalem then (some Greeks, apparently led by Marcus, who were not considered by Hadrian to be close to the apostolic Christianity that had been in Jerusalem, did go there, but again they were not faithful to the original teachings, more information is in the article The Ephesus Church Era), it is clear that Catholic scholars have dismissed the idea of unbroken apostolic succession from Jerusalem after 135 A.D. Real scholars will admit that whatever came immediately after Bishop Judas as the leader in Ælia Capitolina was not faithful.

It should also be noted that since the Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem does not have the same biblical doctrines that the first bishops of Jerusalem held, he and his church cannot truly be considered as an apostolic successor. His church claims succession to the heretical apostate Marcus of Jerusalem:

According to the testimonies of the historian Eusebios and from other information, Saint Symeon was succeeded by Justus 1 st (107-111).From then until 134 on the Episcopal throne of the Church ascended twelve more Bishops, who were: Zaccheus, Tobias, Benjamen 1 st , John 1 st , Matthias 1 st , Philip, Seneca, Justus 2 nd , Leuis, Ephraim, Joseph 1 st , and Judas, who all served as bishops at Pella and of whom there is no special information. During this period the local Church was being disturbed externally by the Judaic Christians. …

Most probably it was during this time the last of Hellenic origin Christians who had fled to Pella prior to the destruction of the City, returned to Jerusalem. They settled in Aelia and together with the rest of the Christians they formed a cluster of Christian communities. This resulted in the Church of Jerusalem consisting of Greeks from Pella and elsewhere, and “this Church is retained in the same spot by the nations”. In fact during the disturbed period of Adrian who was rather favourably predisposed towards the Christians, the Episcopal throne was occupied by Markos (134) the first Christian Greek of Aelia. The goodwill of the emperor towards the Greek Christians of Aelia coincided with the acceptance of the justifications for Christianity by the Bishop of Athens Kodratos and of the Athenian philosopher Aristedis. (The First Church. The Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem. http://en.jerusalem-patriarchate.info/history/the-first-church/ accessed 02/05/19)

So, notice that a Greek (or Latin) bishop had the goodwill of the pagan Roman emperor. Marcus was heretical (see also Marcus of Jerusalem).

The Eastern Orthodox saint Irenaeus specifically seems to have eliminated Jerusalem as he wrote:

Further, also, concerning Jerusalem and the Lord, they venture to assert that, if it had been “the city of the great King,” it would not have been deserted. This is just as if any one should say, that if straw were a creation of God, it would never part company with the wheat; and that the vine twigs, if made by God, never would be lopped away and deprived of the clusters…The fruit, therefore, having been sown throughout all the world, she (Jerusalem) was deservedly forsaken, and those things which had formerly brought forth fruit abundantly were taken away; for from these, according to the flesh, were Christ and the apostles enabled to bring forth fruit. But now these are no longer useful for bringing forth fruit. For all things which have a beginning in time must of course have an end in time also (Irenaeus. Adversus haereses, Book IV, Chapter IV, Verse 1).

So while the Eastern Orthodox also consider Irenaeus to be a saint and Jerusalem to be one of the five “Apostolic Sees,” Irenaeus basically taught that God was finished using Jerusalem as a type of headquarters in this age. And, last century at least, The Catholic Encyclopedia concurred.

Notice also some information which is in our free eBook Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?:

No Continuing City

 A Roman Catholic posted some information in Portuguese which for the purpose of this book was translated into English:

The construction of St. Peter’s Basilica only visibly confirmed something that had been a reality for many years: the seat of the Christian faith had been transferred from Jerusalem, the heart of Judaism, to Rome, the center of paganism. And thus Christ’s prophecy about Israel was fulfilled:

“Therefore I say to you, the Kingdom of God will be taken from you, and it will be given to a people who will bear the fruits of it.” (Matthew 21.43)

This prophecy is reaffirmed by St. Paul. He calls Roman Christians of pagan origin “wild olive”, which was grafted in place of “cut branches” (Jews who rejected Jesus as Messiah):

“If some of the branches were cut, and if you, the wild olive tree, were grafted in its place and now you receive sap from the root of the olive tree, do not flatter or belittle the branches.” (Romans 11:17) (A Catequista. Circo de Nero: de matadouro de cristãos a Sede da fé católica. OCatequista.com, 25 Agosto 2017)

Yet saying these verses were intended for rule by the Church of Rome is not how these verses should be understood.

Now, it is true that the seat of top Christian leadership did transfer from Jerusalem. But it ended up in Asia Minor.

That is where the Apostle John went. He was the last writer of the New Testament and the last of the original apostles to die (he died in Ephesus). After John’s death, as well as after the apostasy to hit Jerusalem c. 135, the top leadership went to a Greek leader named Polycarp, who was then succeeded by Greeks and others outside of Judea in various communities.

Furthermore, one very real question to consider is: Was it biblically possible for any “See,” any “headquarters,” of the true church to remain in the same city?

Let us look at what Jesus taught on this matter:

²² You will be hated by all for my Name’s sake, but the one who endures to the end will be saved. ²³ Nevertheless, when they persecute you in this city, flee into another. Amen, I tell you: you will not have finished going through the cities of Israel until the Son of Man comes. (Matthew 10:22-23, EOB).

Jesus, of course, has not yet returned. Whatever Christians there have been in the area of Judaea/Palestine have been chased through all the significant cities in that geographic region since Jesus made this statement. The horrible Crusades also probably helped to insure this. Jesus must be referring to more cities than just those in the area of Judaea/Palestine (such as those regions Jacob was alluding to in Genesis 49:1-27 and James in James 1:1).

Although Jesus taught His church would be continuing (Matthew 16:18; cf. Hebrews 13:1), He also prophesied it would not be possible that any headquarters of the true church could permanently remain in one city for nearly two thousand years (Matthew 10:22-23). Nor would we expect the church to remain headquartered in Ephesus per Jesus’ warning to move its lampstand in Revelation 2:1-5—and the spiritual descendants did move. Jesus also taught that Jerusalem was not essential for worship (John 4:21-24), and that His church would have significant tribulations (John 16:33). Statements from Jesus show that only a church whose headquarters moved many times could possibly be the true church.

Jerome’s Latin Vulgate has Hebrews 13:14 as follows:

“Non enim habemus hic manentem civitatem, sed futuram inquirimus.”

Literally that can be translated in English as:

“For we have not here a continuing city, but we seek one to come.”

Yet Rome, since no later than the mid 2^nd century, has essentially been a continuing “Roman Catholic” city (although for a relatively short time leading Roman Catholic Bishops were based out of Avignon, France in the 14^th century).

Furthermore, Roman Catholics tend to call Rome, “The Eternal City” (Gibbons J, Cardinal. The faith of our fathers: being a plain exposition and vindication of the church founded by Our Lord Jesus Chris, 83^rd reprint edition.  P. J. Kenedy, 1917, p. 120)

Consider, further, the following using Roman and Eastern Orthodox Catholic accepted translations of Hebrews 13:14:

¹⁴ For there is no eternal city for us in this life but we look for one in the life to come. (Hebrews 13:14, Jerusalem Bible of 1966).

¹⁴ For we have not here a permanent city: but we seek that which is to come (Hebrews 13:14, DRB).

¹⁴ we have an everlasting city, but not here; our goal is the city that is one day to be. (Hebrews 13:14, Knox Bible).

¹⁴ For here we have no lasting city, but we seek the one that is to come. (Hebrews 13:14, NABRE)

¹⁴ For we do not have here [on earth] an enduring city, but we seek the one that is to come. (Hebrews 13:14, EOB)

¹⁴ For here we have no continuing city, but we seek the one to come. (Hebrews 13:14, OSB)

Thus, the New Testament effectively proves that no single city, including Rome, could have remained the headquarters of Christendom. Claiming otherwise would contradict the New Testament. It should also be understood that since Hebrews was written in Italy (cf. Hebrews 13:24), this categorically rules out Rome.

The Bible shows that it is the Church of God (Matthew 16:18; Acts 20:28), not a single city, which would “continue” (cf. Hebrews 13:1, NJB) or “endure” (cf. 2 Timothy 2:12, OSB) throughout the Church age. Jesus’ words in Matthew 10:22 point to a church whose main leadership needed to move around a lot.

Furthermore, if there were any such “permanent city,” some think it would be Jerusalem (cf. Revelation 21:2).

Yet, as far as Jerusalem goes, Irenaeus wrote that it was “deservedly forsaken” and “no longer useful for bringing forth fruit” (Irenaeus. Adversus haereses, Book IV, Chapter IV, Verse 1). Although the Eastern Orthodox consider Irenaeus to be a major saint and Jerusalem to be one of the five “Apostolic Sees,” their saint Irenaeus taught that God was finished using Jerusalem.

Irenaeus’ “forsaken” statement is possibly referring to those that fled Jerusalem prior to its destruction in 70 A.D. But much more likely it is a reference to the 135 A.D. takeover and renaming of the city to Ælia Capitolina (for decades it stopped officially being called Jerusalem right after Hadrian’s troops conquered it). The historical reality is that Jerusalem did not continue throughout the church age as THE leading church, nor did any other city for close to two thousand years during this age.

So, did the main leadership of the original catholic Church of God actually need to move around a lot throughout the church age?

Yes. And that is consistent with biblibal prophecies.

So, no, none of the churches currently in Jerusalem has true apostolic succession. More on that, as well as why the Continuing Church of God does have apostolic succession can be found in the free eBook Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Before going further, it should be pointed out that, despite claims from some of them, none of the Protestant churches have apostolic succession–scriptural and historical proofs and details are int he free eBook: Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism.

The second point has to do with the “unity” positions of the Greco-Roman Catholic and certain Protestant leaders.

Here are some comments, also from our free eBook Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?:

Pope Leo XIV and the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople have both pushed for unity despite doctrinal differences that do not align with the biblical teachings of the original catholic church. They have also supported major efforts of the United Nations and World Council of Churches which essentially support at least a type of a one-world government as well as various biblical immoral positions. …

Roman Catholic Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò wrote:

The Holy See has deliberately renounced the supernatural mission of the Church, making itself the servant of the New World Order and Masonic globalism in an antichristic counter-magisterium. The same Roman Dicasteries, occupied by people ideologically aligned with Jorge Mario Bergoglio and protected and promoted by him, now continue unrestrained in their implacable work of demolishing Faith, Morals, ecclesiastical discipline, and monastic and religious life, in an effort as vain as it is unprecedented to transform the Bride of Christ into a philanthropic association enslaved to the Strong Powers. The result is the super-imposition over the true Church of a sect of heretical and depraved Modernists who are intent on legitimizing adultery, sodomy, abortion, euthanasia, idolatry, and any perversion of the intellect and will. (Viganò CM. Viganò on Vatican ‘health’ conference with Fauci: Holy See is ‘making itself the servant of the New World Order.’ LifeSite News, April 20, 2021)

Roman Catholic Cardinal Burke criticized the notion of a one-world government:

“The idea of a one-world government is fundamentally the same phenomenon that was displayed by the builders of the Tower of Babel who presumed to exercise the power of God on earth to unite heaven with earth, which is simply incorrect,” he said. (Baklinski C. Cdl Burke: Vatican’s global pact for ‘new humanism’ promotes one-world gov’t, opposes Christ’s Kingship. LifeSite News, January 3, 2020)

In the CCOG, we believe it is only the establishment of the coming Kingdom of God which is the type of one-world government Christians are biblically told to be supportive of (cf. Revelation 11:15; see also our free booklet, online at ccog.org, titled The Gospel of the Kingdom of God).

As far as the Church of Rome goes, notice something it came out with in 2020 along with certain historical statements:

The Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity has fielded a handbook, three years in the making, entitled: The Bishop and Christian Unity: An Ecumenical Vademecum. … the Vatican is at least becoming more forthright: it no longer hesitates to point out its own break with tradition, as it openly prescribes acts regarded by our forebears as intrinsically evil – as in, gravely sinful in themselves. As in, inadmissible.

No obfuscation, just brazen novelty. From n. 17 of the document, our emphasis:

Catholics not only can, but indeed must, seek out opportunities to pray with other Christians. Certain forms of prayer are particularly appropriate… [T]he ancient Christian practice of praying the psalms and scriptural canticles together (the Prayer of the Church) is a tradition …

[L]et’s revisit that particular moral act in past Church teaching and legislation. Just a quick fly-over, mind you …

• • “No one shall pray in common with heretics and schismatics” –Synod of Laodicea, 363
  • “No one must either pray or sing psalms with heretics” –Council of Carthage, 397
  • “It is not licit for Catholics to attend or take part in an active way in non-catholic ceremonies” –Canon Law, 1917
  • “In all these meetings and conferences, any communication whatsoever in worship must be avoided” – of the Holy Office, 1949

With those few in mind …, reread the Vademecum quote above. What else is there to say?

“Yes, we once thought that was evil. But not anymore. Now, it’s a moral imperative.” (Veni E. Vademecum? “Interchurch,” “Ministers” and Nonsense, Oh My. Whispers of Restoration, December 5, 2020)

So, the Vatican says something it says was evil has been changed to be a moral imperative. The Church of Rome has changed on many things.

It should be mentioned that this author publicly denounced the Ecumenical Vademecum upon learning of it (Thiel B. Ecumenical Vademecum: Rome’s ecumenical plans are NOT what Jesus ‘willed for’. COGwriter.com, December 5, 2020) and later did so on the behalf of the CCOG in a video made public on multiple platforms.

The CCOG is NOT involved in the ecumenical or interfaith movements and has no intention ever to be. This differs from the Vatican, the World Council of Churches, and many in the Eastern Orthodox Church.

This does not mean that the CCOG can never have areas of cooperation with other groups or that all the ecumenical and interfaith movements are working on is of no good. But we believe only having agreement on true biblical doctrine is the way to unite in what might be called an ‘ecumenical’ fashion.

Jesus did NOT come to bring worldwide religious unity in this age:

51 Do you suppose that I came to give peace on earth? I tell you, not at all, but rather division. (Luke 12:51)

The Apostle Paul taught that true unity of faith would not happen until after Jesus returns:

13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; (Ephesians 4:13)

While getting along peaceably with one another is biblically promoted (cf. Romans 12:18), those who believe that true unity of faith comes prior to Jesus’ return are in error. We are not ‘perfect’ until after He comes (cf. 1 John 1:8). The prophesied unity of faith does not happen prior to Jesus’ return.

The Bible shows that a false ecumenical unity will come (Revelation 13:4-8). It was prophesied to be pushed once the first seal of Revelation 6:1-2 was opened–we have been seeing this being pushed (watch also Ecumenism and the ride of the White Horse of the Apocalypse).

Do not fall for the ecumenical unity agenda that the Church of Rome, the Eastern Orthodox, many Protestant leaders, the World Council of Churches, the United Nations, and even the World Economic Forum are pushing.

They, quite frankly, are NOT promoting the unity of the true faith.

COGwriter Peering into Ancient Thyatira (2008)

COGwriter

Have you heard about the Church of God in Thyatira?

In Revelation 2, Jesus said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Catholic Encyclopedia notes this about one of its inquisitors:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The following might be of interest to some:

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

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

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

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

Some items of related interest may include:

In Search of Thyatira This era was predominant circa 1050 A.D. to circa 1600 A.D. The Church during the Inquisition. Here is a link to a related sermon: Thyatira, Succession, and Jezebel.
The Spanish Inquisition and Early Protestant Persecutions Was the Church of Rome really responsible for this? What happened? A video of related interest is titled: The Past and Future Inquisition.
Persecutions by Church and State This article documents some that have occurred against those associated with the COGs and some prophesied to occur. Will those with the cross be the persecutors or the persecuted–this article has the shocking answer. There is also a YouTube video sermon you can watch: The Coming Persecution of the Church. Here is information in the Spanish language: Persecuciones de la Iglesia y el Estado.
Joyce’s Photos of Thyatira Thyatira is the fourth of the seven churches listed in the Book of Revelation. Here some photos of our visit there.
The History of Early Christianity Are you aware that what most people believe is not what truly happened to the true Christian church? Do you know where the early church was based? Do you know what were the doctrines of the early church? Is your faith really based upon the truth or compromise?
Continuing History of the Church of God This pdf booklet is a historical overview of the true Church of God and some of its main opponents from Acts 2 to the 21st century. Related sermon links include Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D. and Continuing History of the Church of God: 4th-16th Centuries and Continuing History of the Church of God: 17th-20th Centuries. The booklet is available in Spanish: Continuación de la Historia de la Iglesia de Dios, German: Kontinuierliche Geschichte der Kirche Gottes, French: L’Histoire Continue de l’Église de Dieu and Ekegusii Omogano Bw’ekanisa Ya Nyasae Egendererete.
News Articles Related to Church History This link is to articles on Church history that were once published on the COG News Page.
ChurchHistoryBook.com This is a URL with some information on Church History.
The Churches of Revelation 2 & 3 Do they matter? Most say they must, but act like they do not. This article contains some history about the Church of God (sometimes referred to as the continuation of Primitive Christianity) over the past 2000 years. It also discusses the concept of church eras. There is also a YouTube video: The Seven Church Eras of Revelation.
What Do Roman Catholic Scholars Actually Teach About Early Church History? Although most believe that the Roman Catholic Church history teaches an unbroken line of succession of bishops beginning with Peter, with stories about most of them, Roman Catholic scholars know the truth of this matter. This eye-opening article is a must-read for any who really wants to know what Roman Catholic history actually admits about the early church.
Nazarene Christianity: Were the Original Christians Nazarenes? Should Christians be Nazarenes today? What were the practices of the Nazarenes.
Location of the Early Church: Another Look at Ephesus, Smyrna, and Rome What actually happened to the primitive Church? And did the Bible tell about this in advance?
Apostolic Succession What really happened? Did structure and beliefs change? Are many of the widely-held current understandings of this even possible? Did you know that Catholic scholars really do not believe that several of the claimed “apostolic sees” of the Orthodox have apostolic succession–despite the fact that the current pontiff himself seems to wish to ignore this view? Is there actually a true church that has ties to any of the apostles that is not part of the Catholic or Orthodox churches? Read this article if you truly are interested in the truth on this matter! Here is a version in the Spanish language La sucesión apostólica. ¿Ocurrió en Roma, Alejandría, Constantinopla, Antioquía, Jerusalén o Asia Menor?
Early Church History: Who Were the Two Major Groups Professed Christ in the Second and Third Centuries? Did you know that many in the second and third centuries felt that there were two major, and separate, professing Christian groups in the second century, but that those in the majority churches tend to now blend the groups together and claim “saints” from both? “Saints” that condemn some of their current beliefs. Who are the two groups?
Do You Practice Mithraism? Many practices and doctrines that mainstream so-called Christian groups have are the same or similar to those of the sun-god Mithras. December 25th was celebrated as his birthday. Do you follow Mithraism combined with the Bible or original Christianity? A sermon video from Vatican City is titled Church of Rome, Mithras, and Isis?
The Churches of Revelation 2 & 3 from 31 A.D. to present: information on all of the seven churches of Revelation 2 & 3.
1. The Ephesus Church Era was predominant from 31 A.D. to circa 135 A.D. The Church of James, Peter, Paul, and John, etc. Here is a link to a related video sermon: Ephesus Church Era.
2. The Smyrna Church Era was predominant circa 135 A.D. to circa 450 A.D. The Church led by Polycarp, Melito, Polycrates, etc. Here is a link to a related video sermon: The Smyrna Church Era.
3. The Pergamos Church Era was predominant circa 450 A.D. to circa 1050 A.D. An especially persecuted Church. Here is a link to a related sermon video: Pergamos Era and the Antichrist.
4. The Thyatira Church Era was predominant circa 1050 A.D. to circa 1600 A.D. The Church during the Inquisition. It claimed succession from the apostles. Here is a link toa related sermon: Thyatira, Succession, and Jezebel.
5. The Sardis Church Era was predominant circa 1600 A.D. to circa 1933 A.D. Discusses some early history of the Seventh Day Baptists, Seventh-day Adventists, CG7-Salem, Jerusalem 7DCG, and COG-7th Day-Denver. Here are two historical sermons: Sardis Church Era: Beginnings, Doctrines, and Leaders and Sardis: SDBs, SDAs, & CG7s.
6. The Philadelphia Church Era and Remnant Though the era was predominant circa 1933 A.D. to 1986 A.D., but a remnant has continued. The old Radio Church of God and old Worldwide Church of God were part of the era, and now the remnant of that era is basically the most faithful in the Church of God, like who hold to the beliefs and practices of the Continuing Church of God. Here is a link to a related sermon: Philadelphia Church Era: History & Teachings.
7. The Laodicean Church Era has been predominant circa 1986 A.D. to present. The Laodiceans are non-Philadelphians who mainly descended from the old WCG or its offshoots.  They do not properly understand the work or biblical prophecies and will face the Great Tribulation if they do not repent. One video of related interest is 50+ Laodicean Prophetic Errors. See also Do You Hold to Any of These Laodicean Prophetic Errors?
When Will the Great Tribulation Begin? Can the Great Tribulation begin today? What happens before the Great Tribulation in the “beginning of sorrows”? What happens in the Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord? Is this the time of the Gentiles? When is the earliest that the Great Tribulation can begin? What is the Day of the Lord? Who are the 144,000?
Where is the True Christian Church Today? This free online pdf booklet answers that question and includes 18 proofs, clues, and signs to identify the true vs. false Christian church. Plus 7 proofs, clues, and signs to help identify Laodicean churches. A related sermon is also available: Where is the True Christian Church? Here is a link to the booklet in the Spanish language: ¿Dónde está la verdadera Iglesia cristiana de hoy? Here is a link in the German language: WO IST DIE WAHRE CHRISTLICHE KIRCHE HEUTE? Here is a link in the French language: Où est la vraie Église Chrétienne aujourd’hui?

Hierapolis, Turkey (Photo by Joyce Thiel)

COGwriter

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

Why?

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

The Protestant scholars Roberts and Donaldson wrote this:

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

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

Do you hold to those original Christian doctrines?

Apollinaris Wrote About the Passover

Here is nearly all of what is available from what Apollinaris wrote:

There are, then, some who through ignorance raise disputes about these things (though their conduct is pardonable: for ignorance is no subject for blame — it rather needs further instruction), and say that on the fourteenth day the Lord ate the lamb with the disciples, and that on the great day of the feast of unleavened bread He Himself suffered; and they quote Matthew as speaking in accordance with their view. Wherefore their opinion is contrary to the law, and the Gospels seem to be at variance with them…The fourteenth day, the true Passover of the Lord; the great sacrifice, the Son of God instead of the lamb, who was bound, who bound the strong, and who was judged, though Judge of living and dead, and who was delivered into the hands of sinners to be crucified, who was lifted up on the horns of the unicorn, and who was pierced in His holy side, who poured forth from His side the two purifying elements, water and blood, word and spirit, and who was buried on the day of the passover, the stone being placed upon the tomb (Apollinaris. From the Book Concerning Passover. Translated by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Excerpted from Volume I of The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, editors; American Edition copyright © 1885. Copyright © 2001 Peter Kirby).

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

One Anglican scholar commented;

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

Quartodecimans held to the original position of the apostles.

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

Apollinaris was praised by the Church of God leader Serapion of Antioch:

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

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

Apollinaris and the Millennium

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

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

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

Here is a writing from the Eastern Orthodox:

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

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

The immediate followers of Martin Luther actually condemned the Anabaptists for teaching the millennial reign of Christ as the Lutherans opposed that biblical teaching:

Article XVII: Of Christ’s Return to Judgment. Also they teach that at the Consummation of the World Christ will appear for judgment and will raise up all the dead; He will give to the godly and elect eternal life and everlasting joys, but ungodly men and the devils He will condemn to be tormented without end. They condemn the Anabaptists, who think that there will be an end to the punishments of condemned men and devils. They condemn also others who are now spreading certain Jewish opinions, that before the resurrection of the dead the godly shall take possession of the kingdom of the world, the ungodly being everywhere suppressed. (The Confession of Faith: Which Was Submitted to His Imperial Majesty Charles V. At the Diet of Augsburg in the Year 1530. by Philip Melanchthon, 1497-1560. Translated by F. Bente and W. H. T. Dau. Published in: Triglot Concordia: The Symbolical Books of the Ev. Lutheran Church. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 95.)

There would have been no reason to condemn groups for specific teachings if those groups did not teach them. Hence, not just Roman Catholic sources, but Protestant ones as well have condemned millenarianism.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

14:42

Apollinaris of Hierapolis

Who was Apollinaris of Hierapolis? Apollinaris was a leader of the Christian church in the 2nd century. He was believed to be the bishop of Hierapolis, which is located in modern day Turkey. But what did he believe? What doctrines did Apollinaris adhere to? As a leader of the early church Apollinaris held to the original doctrines of early Christianity. Apollinaris is considered to be a saint by the Roman Catholic church. So, if Apollinaris held to the tenets of the original Christian church, which he did, and since the Roman Catholics considered Apollinaris a saint, which they did, and still do, one would think Apollinaris would also hold to the same beliefs as the Roman Catholic church. Let’s see. Apollinaris was a Quartodeciman, which means he observed the Passover on the 14th of Nisan,. The Roman Catholics changed the date of the Passover to Sunday and called it Easter. Apollinaris held to the belief of the original Christian church in a binitarian God. The Roman Catholics, contrary to the original church, changed their belief to a trinitarian god. Apollinaris believed in the still future 1,000-year Millennium as defined in the Bible. The Roman Catholic teaching appears to be the only doctrine associated with Antichrist that is condemned in the current official Catechism of the Catholic Church. Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. (NKJV) So who changed? Apollinaris or the Roman Catholic church? Dr. Thiel shines the light of the Bible on this question with documented quotes from Roman Catholic sources as well as the Bible.

Here is a link to our video: Apollinaris of Hierapolis.

Some items of possibly related interest may include the following:

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

Artist’s portrayal Lucian of Antioch
(Modified from free-images.com)

COGwriter

The Catholics of Rome consider January 7th as the day to honor Lucian of Antioch. This should seem to be somewhat odd to them.

Why?

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

The Protestant scholar Philip Schaff wrote this:

Lucian of Antioch

Lucian was an eminent presbyter of Antioch and martyr of the Diocletian persecution, renewed by Maximin. Very little is known of him. He was transported from Antioch to Nicomedia, where the emperor then resided, made a noble confession of his faith before the judge and died under the tortures in prison (311). His memory was celebrated in Antioch on the 7th of January. His piety was of the severely ascetic type.

His memory was obscured by the suspicion of unsoundness in the faith. Eusebius twice mentions him and his glorious martyrdom, but is silent about his theological opinions. Alexander of Alexandria, in an encyclical of 321, associates him with Paul of Samosata and makes him responsible for the Arian heresy; he also says that he was excommunicated or kept aloof from the church (ἀποσυνάγωγος ἔμεινε) during the episcopate of Domnus, Timaeus, and Cyrillus …

Lucianus is known also by his critical revision of the text of the Septuagint and the Greek Testament. Jerome mentions that copies were known in his day as “exemplaria Lucianea,” but in other places he speaks rather disparagingly of the texts of Lucian, and of Hesychius, a bishop of Egypt (who distinguished himself in the same field). In the absence of definite information it is impossible to decide the merits of his critical labors. His Hebrew scholarship is uncertain, and hence we do not know whether his revision of the Septuagint was made from the original…(Schaff, Philip, History of the Christian Church, Lucian of Antioch (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1997. This material has been carefully compared, corrected, and emended –according to the 1910 edition of Charles Scribner’s Sons — by The Electronic Bible Society, Dallas, TX, 1998)

Like Ignatius, Polycarp, Melito, Apollinaris would be considered a binitarian/semi-arian. However, those associated with the Catholics of Rome and the Eastern Orthodox accepted the trinitarian position of Theodosius which they adopted in 381.

Notice what the Roman Catholic Cardinal Newman wrote:

Lucian, who schismatized or was excommunicated on his deposition, held heretical tenets of a diametrically opposite nature, that is, such as were afterwards called Semi-Arian; Paulus himself advocating a doctrine which nearly resembled what is commonly called the Sabellian.

More shall be said concerning Paulus of Samosata presently; but now let us advance to the history of this Lucian, a man of learning, and at length a martyr, but who may almost be considered the author of Arianism … that during the times of the three bishops who successively followed Paulus, Lucian was under excommunication. The Catholics too, are silent in his vindication, and some of them actually admit his unsoundness in faith … (Cardinal Newman, John Henry. The Arians of the Fourth Century. Longmans, Green, & Co., New York, 1908, p.7)

I would rather direct the reader’s attention to the particular form which the Antiochene corruptions seem to have assumed, viz., that of Judaism… (Cardinal Newman, John Henry. The Arians of the Fourth Century. Longmans, Green, & Co., New York, 1908, p.9)

Although some Eastern Orthodox claim Lucian reconciled with them in 285 (Sanidopoulos J. The Orthodoxy of Lucian of Antioch. ORTHODOX CHRISTIANITY THEN AND NOW, October 15, 2009 https://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2009/10/orthodoxy-of-lucian-of-antioch.html#:~:text=Church%20authorities%20officially%20accepted%20a,.%2C%209%3A6), there does not look to be any real proof of that. Furthermore, in 321 A.D. he was listed as an apostate by Alexander of Alexandria in 321 (Encyclical Letter of Alexander, Archbishop of Alexandria, upon his Deposition and Excommunication of Arius, 321). Hence, that is evidence that Lucian was NOT ever “reconciled” with the Greco-Roman confederation that was emerging in the 3rd and 4th centuries.

The Continuing Church of God has published some information on Lucian in two of its free e-books. Here is information found in Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?:

In the late 3rd through early 4th century, there was a church leader known as Lucian of Antioch. Lucian was not in communion with the succession of at least three Greco-Roman bishops of Antioch, had a school based on literal biblical interpretation, “savoured of Judaism,” and was “Semi-Arian” (binitarian) (Newman JH, Cardinal. The Arians of the Fourth Century. Longmans, Green, & Co., New York, 1908, pp. 5, 9, 277, 406). Lucian reportedly was a Sabbatarian (Wilkinson BG. The Truth Triumphant. TEACH Services, Reprint 1994, pp. 55-57; Kohen E. History of the Byzantine Jews. University Press of America, 2007, p. 53).

In a seemingly 4th century creed ascribed to him, Lucian (or perhaps penned by a disciple) used the term “Catholic Church of God” (Schaff P. The Creeds of Christendom: The Greek and Latin creeds, with translations, Volume II. Harper and Brothers, 1877, pp. 28-29). This would not seem to have been a reference to the Greco-Roman churches as Lucian opposed the Alexandrian school which they encouraged. Lucian looks to have been a Church of God leader.

Lucian’s Creed seems to be the oldest known document with the exact expression “Catholic Church of God.” Although as shown already, Ignatius implied that as he used both “church of God” and “catholic Church” expressions in his 2nd century Letter to the Smyrnaeans. …

Perhaps it should be emphasized that the school in Antioch that Lucian ran was opposed to the allegorical and semi-Gnostic school of Alexandria. The schools were NOT in true communion with each other. …

It should be clear that no later than the early 3rd century (but most likely by the mid-late 2nd century) those in Asia Minor and Antioch were not in communion with those of Rome, Jerusalem, and Alexandria. Rome was also supportive of the ‘allegorical’ school of Alexandria that Origen was part of, but not of the ‘literal’ school that Lucian of Antioch was associated with in the 3rd century. Origen also supported infant baptism that was not supported by those of Asia Minor or Antioch. …

Although there are contradictory reports about him and his theology (like him supposedly reconciling with the area’s Greco-Roman Bishop while still reportedly maintaining his binitarianism, Sabbath-keeping, biblical literalism, etc.), he looks to probably have been a COG leader. If so, Lucian may be one who held the succession mantle from about 275 through his martyrdom in 312. …

Lucian himself, improves Greek Septuagint by using Hebrew Masoretic documents and also edits the ‘Traditional Text’ of the Greek New Testament. …

It should be noted, however, that during the time of Asclepiades the Confessor we assert that there were Christian leaders in Antioch of Syria that did not follow him. We feel that later leaders that are NOT on the Orthodox succession lists, such as perhaps Lucian (270-312) who looked to have held COG doctrines, would have had God’s faithful succession—the succession we in the CCOG would consider as the standard. That position is consistent with the following:

Jewish Christianity … up to the fourth century, the followers of Jesus who observed ritual practices of the Mosaic Law and preserved theological traditions of Judaic origin had notable communities in Syria – (Myllykoski M. James the Just in History and Tradition: Perspectives of Past and Present Scholarship. Currents in Biblical Research, 2006, Vol. 5.1: 73-122)

Hence, we believe that there were ‘Judaic‘ Syrian Antiochians in our 3rd and 4th century succession lists (some whose names are known, with others unknown), which is consistent with some available historical claims. …

Apostolic Succession List as put together by the Continuing Church of God

c. 31 – c. 64-68 Apostle Peter
c. 67 – c. 98-102 Apostle John
c. 100 – c. 157 Polycarp of Smyrna
c. 157 – c. 160 Thraseas of Smyrna
c. 160 – c. 167 Sagaris of Laodicea
c. 167 – c. 170 Papirius of Smyrna
c. 170 – c. 180 Melito of Sardis
c. 180 – c. 200 Polycrates of Ephesus
c. 200 – c. 220 Camerius of Smyrna
c. 220 – c. 254 Nepos of Arsinoe
c. 254 – c. 275 Unnamed Antiochian(s) or possibly Dorotheus
c. 275 – 312 Lucian of Antioch …

In the 3rd and 4th centuries, Lucian of Antioch was also known to be binitarian (Newman JH, Cardinal. The Arians of the Fourth Century, pp. 277, 406). …

Notice this condemnation by a Roman Catholic Cardinal for holding the original view of the Godhead:

Lucian, who schismatized or was excommunicated on his deposition, held heretical tenets of a diametrically opposite nature, that is, such as were afterwards called Semi-Arian . . . I would rather direct the reader’s attention to the particular form which the Antiochene corruptions seem to have assumed, viz., that of Judaism . . . (Newman JH, Cardinal. The Arians of the Fourth Century, pp. 7,9).

This is showing that there were people in the Antioch area in the 3rd and 4th centuries that held to some form of Judeao-Christianity, as well to binitarianism, in the late 3rd entury according to Catholic sources, who were not part of the group in communion with Rome and Alexandria.

Here is something from a later book put out by the Continuing Church of God titled Mysteries of God: What is God?:

The following is claimed to be the Creed of Lucian of Antioch (it surfaced a couple of decades after he was martyred)—if Lucian was the actual writer, it may be the oldest written creed:

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty; And in the Lord Jesus Christ, his Son, who was begotten of him before all ages, the Divine Logos, through whom all things were made, both those in the heavens and those on the earth; who came down and was made flesh; and suffered; and rose again; and ascended to the heavens; and shall come again to judge the quick and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost; and in the resurrection of the flesh; and in the life of the world to come; and in a kingdom of heaven; and in one Catholic Church of God which extends to the ends of the earth. (Schaff P. The Creeds of Christendom: The Greek and Latin creeds, with translations, Volume II. Harper and Brothers, 1877, pp. 28-29)

Note: While Jesus was not physically begotten until about nine months before His human birth, the plan for His birth existed before the ages of the earth began (cf. Revelation 13:8). Note also that the original Greek text, καθολικὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ θεοῦ, does not separately capitalize ‘Catholic Church.’

Yet it is interesting that what may be the oldest ‘creed’ refers to the catholic church of God as well as teaches that Jesus was made flesh.

Lucian of Antioch was not in communion with the Greco-Roman bishops of Antioch nor those of Alexandria, and yet he is considered a saint by the Greco-Romans. Although there are contradictory reports about him and his theology (like him supposedly reconciling with the area’s Greco-Roman Bishop while still reportedly maintaining his binitarianism, Sabbath-keeping, biblical literalism, etc.), he held COG doctrines. Lucian looks to be the one who held the church leadership succession mantle from about 275 through his martyrdom in 312. …

[T]here were people in the Antioch area in the 3rd and 4th centuries that held to some form of Judeao-Christianity, as well to binitarianism. And who, according to Roman Catholic sources, were not part of the group in communion with Rome and Alexandria. Furthermore, in 321 A.D. Lucian was listed as an apostate by Alexander of Alexandria (Encyclical Letter of Alexander, Archbishop of Alexandria, upon his Deposition and Excommunication of Arius, 321). Hence, Lucian was not considered to have reconciled with the Greco-Roman confederation before his death—though he is claimed to be a saint by the modern Greco-Roman Catholic churches.

The Catholic Encyclopedia states:

Lucian of Antioch … Though he cannot be accused of having shared the theological views of Paul of Samosata, he fell under suspicion at the time of Paul’s condemnation, and was compelled to sever his communion with the Church …  The opposition to the allegorizing tendencies of the Alexandrines centred in him. He rejected this system entirely and propounded a system of literal interpretation … (Healy PJ. Lucian of Antioch. The Catholic Encyclopedia)

Yes, those who literally believed scripture were condemned by the allegorists. Lucian was probably considered to be a type of ‘Paulician,’ which is a name the Greco-Romans assigned to people with beliefs like his. …

Here is a list of early binitarians and trinitarians with their respective centuries:

Binitarians                                                  Trinitarians
Ignatius 1st/2nd                                            Valentinus 2nd
Polycarp 1st/2nd                                           Montanus 2nd
Justin Martyr 2nd                                        Tertullian 2nd/3rd
Athenagoras 2nd
Melito 2nd
Theophilus 2nd
Irenaeus 2nd
Hippolytus 3rd
Lucian 3rd/4th
Eusebius 4th

Everyone in that binitarian list is considered to be a saint by at least some of the Greco-Roman Catholics, whereas those listed as trinitarians are ALL considered to be heretics/apostates by the Greco-Roman Catholics. This should help show all willing to believe the truth that early professor of Jesus were binitarian, not trinitarian. …

5. Council of Tarsus (358 or later)

• Supported the Semi-Arian position with a creed about the same as the Council of Anycyra. It declared that the Lucian creed should be the guide (Sozomen. Ecclesiastical History, Book VI, Chapter 11) …

The two earliest know creeds (the Old Roman Form and Creed of Lucian) were not trinitarian. …

In the late 3rd through early 4th century, there was a church leader known as Lucian of Antioch. Lucian was not in communion with the succession of at least three Greco-Roman bishops of Antioch, had a school based on literal biblical interpretation, “savoured of Judaism,” and was “Semi-Arian” (binitarian) (Newman JH, Cardinal. The Arians of the Fourth Century. Longmans, Green, & Co., New York, 1908, pp. 5, 9, 277, 406). Lucian reportedly was a Sabbatarian (Wilkinson BG. The Truth Triumphant. 1944. TEACH Services, Reprint 1994, pp. 55-57; Kohen E. History of the Byzantine Jews. University Press of America, 2007, p. 53).

In a seemingly 4th century creed ascribed to him, Lucian (or perhaps penned by a disciple) used the term “Catholic Church of God” (Schaff P. The Creeds of Christendom: The Greek and Latin creeds, with translations, Volume II. Harper and Brothers, 1877, pp. 28-29). This would not seem to have been a reference to the Greco-Roman churches as Lucian opposed the Alexandrian school which they encouraged. Lucian looks to have been a Church of God leader.

Lucian’s Creed seems to be the oldest known document with the exact expression “Catholic Church of God.” Although as shown already, Ignatius implied that as he used both “church of God” and “catholic Church” expressions in his 2nd century Letter to the Smyrnaeans.

Paulicians?

On February 27, 380, Roman Emperor Theodosius decreed only those who accepted his trinitarian creed could call themselves “Catholic Christians.”
However, some of those who disagreed with Theodosius still used it after Theodosius’ decree. Fred Conybeare reported that in the Middle Ages the Paulicians of Armenia continued to state,

“They were the ‘holy, universal, and apostolic Church,’ founded by Jesus Christ and his apostles” (Conybeare, p. xxxiii). Those called Paulicians opposed Sunday observance and the Greco-Roman festivals, while apparently observing the seventh-day Sabbath (Ibid, pp. clii, cxciii).

Also, notice this about them:

They called themselves the Apostolic Catholic church, but …  nicknamed Paulicians by their enemies … (Paulicians. The Encyclopaedia Britannica: Mun to Pay. 1911, p. 961; Blackwell D. A HANDBOOK OF CHURCH HISTORY: A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Ambassador College Graduate School of Theology. April 1973, p.29)

In Kurtz’s Church History, article Nostic and Manichean Heretics:

The Catholics, this sect called Romans, gave them the name Paulicians. (Blackwell, p. 48)

The Paulicians claimed to be THE “holy universal and apostolic church” founded by Jesus Christ and his apostles. Of the false churches, they would say: “We do not belong to these, for they have long ago broken connection with the church.” (Lesson 50 – I Will Build My Church, Part 2. 58 Lesson: Ambassador College Bible Correspondence Course, 1965)

So, while the biblical name of the true church was Church of God, the term catholic was also associated with the faithful as well as others who adopted that name.

Lucian had to deal with the allegorical scholars of his day.

He and his school stood opposed to them.

His non-trinitarian creed proclaimed the catholic Church of God.

Lucian stood for the original view of the Godhead and looks to have kept the seventh-day Sabbath. Since he reportedly had Judeo-practices, it can be safely assumed he did not eat biblically unclean meat.

Because of those differences, he could not have been in communion with the Greco-Roman churches, which helps explain why the Alexandrian Archbishop Alexander denounced him as apostate. Yet, the Greco-Roman Catholics now claim him as one of their saints.

Lucian was martyred by the Roman Emperor Maximus.

Decades AFTER his martyrdom, let me add that the trinitarian Emperor Theodosius declared that the Paulicians and others who did not accept his trinitarian decree could no longer use the term “catholic”

Lucian, though a well known Church of God leader, faced tests and challenges.

Jesus prophesied the following:

21 “Now brother will deliver up brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents and cause them to be put to death. 22 And you will be hated by all for My name’s sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved.” (Matthew 10:21-22)

While we do not know who betrayed him, Lucian endured to the end.

So, we know that Lucian would be saved.

If you, too are a true Church of God Christian, and you endure to the end, you will be able to meet Lucian after the second resurrection.

Some items of possibly related interest may include the following:

Lucian of Antioch He was an early church leader that ran a school promoting scripture over allegory and tradition. He also held a binitarian view of the Godhead.
Mysteries of God: What is God? Is God omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent? Does the Godhead consist of a closed trinity or an expanding family?
Some Similarities and Differences Between the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Continuing Church of God Both groups claim to be the original church, but both groups have differing ways to claim it. Both groups have some amazing similarities and some major differences. Do you know what they are? Here is a link to a related sermon: Eastern Orthodox 40+ Similar Beliefs to the CCOG.
Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.
Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism The CCOG is NOT Protestant. This free online book explains how the real Church of God differs from mainstream/traditional Protestants. Several sermons related to the free book are also available: Protestant, Baptist, and CCOG History; The First Protestant, God’s Command, Grace, & Character; The New Testament, Martin Luther, and the Canon; Eucharist, Passover, and Easter; Views of Jews, Lost Tribes, Warfare, & Baptism; Scripture vs. Tradition, Sabbath vs. Sunday; Church Services, Sunday, Heaven, and God’s Plan; Seventh Day Baptists/Adventists/Messianics: Protestant or COG?; Millennial Kingdom of God and God’s Plan of Salvation; Crosses, Trees, Tithes, and Unclean Meats; The Godhead and the Trinity; Fleeing or Rapture?; and Ecumenism, Rome, and CCOG Differences.
Tradition and Scripture: From the Bible and Church Writings Are traditions on equal par with scripture? Many believe that is what Peter, John, and Paul taught. But did they? Two related sermons are available Scripture and Traditions and Tradition and Scripture.
Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism The CCOG is NOT Protestant. This free online book explains how the real Church of God differs from mainstream/traditional Protestants. Several sermons related to the free book are also available: Protestant, Baptist, and CCOG History; The First Protestant, God’s Command, Grace, & Character; The New Testament, Martin Luther, and the Canon; Eucharist, Passover, and Easter; Views of Jews, Lost Tribes, Warfare, & Baptism; Scripture vs. Tradition, Sabbath vs. Sunday; Church Services, Sunday, Heaven, and God’s Plan; Seventh Day Baptists/Adventists/Messianics: Protestant or COG?; Millennial Kingdom of God and God’s Plan of Salvation; Crosses, Trees, Tithes, and Unclean Meats; The Godhead and the Trinity; Fleeing or Rapture?; and Ecumenism, Rome, and CCOG Differences.
Where is the True Christian Church Today? This free online pdf booklet answers that question and includes 18 proofs, clues, and signs to identify the true vs. false Christian church. Plus 7 proofs, clues, and signs to help identify Laodicean churches. A related sermon is also available: Where is the True Christian Church? Here is a link to the booklet in the Spanish language: ¿Dónde está la verdadera Iglesia cristiana de hoy? Here is a link in the German language: WO IST DIE WAHRE CHRISTLICHE KIRCHE HEUTE? Here is a link in the French language: Où est la vraie Église Chrétienne aujourd’hui?
Continuing History of the Church of God This pdf booklet is a historical overview of the true Church of God and some of its main opponents from Acts 2 to the 21st century. Related sermon links include Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D. and Continuing History of the Church of God: 4th-16th Centuries and Continuing History of the Church of God: 17th-20th Centuries. The booklet is available in Spanish: Continuación de la Historia de la Iglesia de Dios, German: Kontinuierliche Geschichte der Kirche Gottes, French: L’Histoire Continue de l’Église de Dieu and Ekegusii Omogano Bw’ekanisa Ya Nyasae Egendererete.
The History of Early Christianity Are you aware that what most people believe is not what truly happened to the true Christian church? Do you know where the early church was based? Do you know what were the doctrines of the early church? Is your faith really based upon the truth or compromise?

COGwriter at site of “Church of the Apocalypse/Revelation” on Patmos in 2008

COGwriter

Seven churches are mentioned in Revelation 1, with messages given to them in the next two chapters.

Earlier this year, two CCOG members from New Zealand visited most of the areas that the seven churches were in. They sent in video recordings which ended up in the 2025 Behind the Work presentation:

That said, my wife Joyce and I have been able to visit the area of each of those seven as well as the Island of Patmos, where John was given the Revelation.

Tracing the history of the Christian church through the churches of Revelation 2 & 3 gives strong indications of who the descendants of the true church are today. This tracing provides information that demonstrates that the true Church of God (COG) is neither Protestant nor Eastern Orthodox nor Roman Catholic, but is truly the church that has continued with the same beliefs as the original apostles (see also Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church).

The Continuing Church of God and certain others claiming to be in the Church of God trace their history from the Book of Acts and through the church eras of Revelation 2 & 3.

Yet, the prevailing attitude among many in the sabbatarian Churches of God (COGs) seems to be that this is not a particularly important issue, and some who used to teach it, teach against it. Is this correct or do churches of Revelation 2 & 3 matter?

Now everyone truly part of the COG would agree that the Churches of Revelation 2 & 3 must to some degree matter (as do serious professing Christian people outside the COGs). But while many will point out that the term “church era” is not mentioned in the Bible, they often forget to mention that the Church will have factions (1 Corinthians 11:19), hence it will not entirely be uniform. Many now seem to teach that the messages to the seven churches were only for the time that John penned the Book of Revelation. And even more appear to act like the messages to the Churches in Revelation do not matter much.

Many who were once part of the old Worldwide Church of God (WCG) are puzzled as to why there are so many groups that split off from WCG, yet if they understood the messages to the “Church in Philadelphia” (Revelation 3:7) and the “Church of the Laodiceans” (Revelation 3:13), they would better understand–and hopefully make the appropriate changes with their life and their fellowship. Those who accept the idea of ‘church eras’ have always taught that in the end (which would now be the 21st century), the Laodiceans would vastly outnumber the remaining Philadelphians. That is part of why there are so many claimed COG groups today.

Here is something that the late Herbert W. Armstrong taught about the churches of Revelation:

Now, here we find, while it’s pictured as seven churches, it’s really seven stages of the one True Church.., in seven successive times. Also, you’ll find every one of the seven conditions in the church at all times but, in the early years, the Ephesus condition dominated and the tail end of it the Laodicean condition is to dominate on the earth and there you are. (Armstrong HW. History of the True Church – Part 4. Radio broadcast, transcript)

And Laodicea does dominate numerically today.

As far as the Philadelphians and the fate of the Laodiceans goes, the late evangelist Leroy Neff wrote this when he was part of the old Radio Church of God:

The Church of Philadelphia Compared with Laodicea

Let’s compare this parable and the Church of Laodicea with the Church of Philadelphia. We have proved through history and through God’s Word that this work, the Radio Church of God, is the “Philadelphia Era” of the Church.

Notice now the differences. Revelation 3:7-13: “And to the angel of the Church in Philadelphia write these things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that OPENETH, and no man SHUTTETH; and SHUTTETH and no man openeth.” The great door that God has opened to this work is the facility to go into all the world and preach the gospel; the door of radio, the door of the printing press, plus many other such doors. God has set before us an open door and no MAN can shut it. God can shut it, and He will when the work is finished and the Philadelphia Church goes to a place of safety.

“I know thy works: Behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name” (verse 8). Notice that this Church has works. It has works of ZEAL and of REPENTANCE. This Church has only a little strength.

But, by contrast, the Church of Laodicea believes that IT is increased with goods and has a great deal of strength. Philadelphia has little strength to do this great work that God has given it to do. God has opened the door, and yet look how insignificant, how weak, how little strength we as a Church have to do that work. How much we lack in every way, and yet God has opened the door and has given us certain vital, supernatural, spiritual gifts. Very often we lack enough money to pay the radio bills and other expenses. WE ARE FEW IN NUMBER, while many other eras of the Church of God numbered in the hundreds of thousands. We indeed have little strength. And yet, look at the great power that God has placed before us.

Let’s bring it down to the individual level even though it is referring primarily to the Church as a whole. Most of us as individuals realize how little strength we really have, how we lack in some of the spiritual gifts. God has given the Church a good measure of wisdom and of knowledge and faith. He has given us many other gifts but we still lack in many things, but we also realize it. Our Church has not denied the name of God.

THIS Church is going to be protected from the hour of temptation, or of trial and tribulation which will come upon all the world (Rev. 3:16). But the Church of Laodicea must go through severe tribulation…

The Church of Laodicea is to be lukewarm, lacking in zeal and repentance.The Laodicean Church is not going to be worthy to escape to a place of safety. When it is too late, they will find that the Church of Philadelphia has gone to safety. Only two choices remain for each person left. They will be tried by the fire of men, and may lose their lives in severe tortures; or if they recant, they will lose their lives in the final gehenna fire. In either case, they will be tried in the fire. If they are tried by the fire of men and still overcome, they will be given eternal life. If they fail this, the final GEHENNA FIRE with everlasting destruction will be their doom. Judging from the parable of the ten virgins, if you are found in the Church of Laodicea, YOU PROBABLY DON’T KNOW IT. You may think you are in the Church that will go to safety. When you find out it will be too late. (Neff L. What Is the “LAODICEAN CHURCH”? Good News August 1959 Vol. VIII, Number 8.)

Many do not truly believe that today. As a result, the non-Philadelphian groups have improperly changed doctrines, so much so in the prophetic region, that most will not know when the Great Tribulation will begin until it is too late (for a brief prophetic listing of such errors, see Is there a need for a prophet now?).

Now, one of the many unique aspects of the Book of Revelation is that it is the only book of the Bible with this type of blessing, “Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in it; for the time is near” (1:3). Therefore it is very important to read and try to keep what is written in it.

Yet most, once part of the COG, despite keeping the commandments and having the testimony of Jesus (Revelation 12:17), will not truly do so (Revelation 3:14-22). What about you?

For more information, please check out the following:

The Seven Church Eras of Revelation A summary of the history of the Christian church’s history is included in chapters 2 & 3 of the Book of Revelation. Do you know what happened to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis, and Philadelphia? What are some signs of Laodicea? Who is keeping the word of God and who is holding to traditions of men above the Bible? This is a video.
Old Testament Church Eras Are there seven church eras in the Old Testament? Do they parallel those in Revelation 2 &3?
The Churches of Revelation 2 & 3 from 31 A.D. to present: information on all of the seven churches of Revelation 2 & 3. There is also a YouTube video: The Seven Church Eras of Revelation. There is also a version in the Spanish language: Las Siete Iglesias de Apocalipsis 2 & 3.
Attending the Church of Choice This article discusses whose choice is important to worship God; should you attend the church of your choice or the church of God’s choice?
Why is there a Philadelphian remnant of the true Christian Church of God? Did the old Worldwide Church of God essentially predict a Philadelphian remnant? Is a Philadelphian remnant needed for end-time prophecies to be fulfilled? Here is a link to a related sermon: The Philadelphia Remnant.
1. The Ephesus Church Era was predominant from 31 A.D. to circa 135 A.D. The Church of James, Peter, Paul, and John, etc. Here is a link to a related video sermon: Ephesus Church Era.
2. The Smyrna Church Era was predominant circa 135 A.D. to circa 450 A.D. The Church led by Polycarp, Melito, Polycrates, etc. Here is a link to a related video sermon: The Smyrna Church Era.
3. The Pergamos Church Era was predominant circa 450 A.D. to circa 1050 A.D. An especially persecuted Church. Here is a link to a related sermon video: Pergamos Era and the Antichrist.
4. The Thyatira Church Era was predominant circa 1050 A.D. to circa 1600 A.D. The Church during the Inquisition. It claimed succession from the apostles. Here is a link toa related sermon: Thyatira, Succession, and Jezebel.
5. The Sardis Church Era was predominant circa 1600 A.D. to circa 1933 A.D. Discusses some early history of the Seventh Day Baptists, Seventh-day Adventists, CG7-Salem, Jerusalem 7DCG, and COG-7th Day-Denver. Here are two historical sermons: Sardis Church Era: Beginnings, Doctrines, and Leaders and Sardis: SDBs, SDAs, & CG7s.
6. The Philadelphia Church Era and Remnant Though the era was predominant circa 1933 A.D. to 1986 A.D., but some few faithful are still in it as a remnant has continued. The old Radio Church of God and old Worldwide Church of God were part of the era, and now the remnant of that era is basically the most faithful in the Church of God, like who hold to the beliefs and practices of the Continuing Church of God. Here is a link to a related sermon: Philadelphia Church Era: History & Teachings.
7. The Laodicean Church Era has been predominant circa 1986 A.D. to present.–and most end time Christians are part of it. The Laodiceans are non-Philadelphians who mainly descended from the old WCG or its offshoots.  They do not properly understand the work or biblical prophecies and will face the Great Tribulation if they do not repent. One video of related interest is 50+ Laodicean Prophetic Errors. See also Do You Hold to Any of These Laodicean Prophetic Errors?
Continuing History of the Church of God This pdf booklet is a historical overview of the true Church of God and some of its main opponents from Acts 2 to the 21st century. Related sermon links include Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D. and Continuing History of the Church of God: 4th-16th Centuries and Continuing History of the Church of God: 17th-20th Centuries. The booklet is available in Spanish: Continuación de la Historia de la Iglesia de Dios, German: Kontinuierliche Geschichte der Kirche Gottes, French: L Histoire Continue de l Église de Dieu and Ekegusii Omogano Bw’ekanisa Ya Nyasae Egendererete.
Unity: Which COG for You? Why so many groups? Why is there lack of unity in the Churches of God? Has it always been this way? What can/should be done about it? Here is a related article in the Spanish language: Unidad: ¿Cuál Iglesia de Dios para usted?
What Do Roman Catholic Scholars Actually Teach About Early Church History? Although most believe that the Roman Catholic Church history teaches an unbroken line of succession of bishops beginning with Peter, with stories about most of them, Roman Catholic scholars know the truth of this matter. Is telling the truth about the early church citing Catholic accepted sources anti-Catholic? This eye-opening article is a must-read for any who really wants to know what Roman Catholic history actually admits about the early church. There is also a YouTube sermon on the subject titled Church of God or Church of Rome: What Do Catholic Scholars Admit About Early Church History?
Nazarene Christianity: Were the Original Christians Nazarenes? Who were the Nazarene Christians? What did they believe? Should 21st century Christians be modern Nazarenes? Is there a group that exists now that traces its history through the Nazarenes and holds the same beliefs today? Here is a link to a related video sermon Nazarene Christians: Were the early Christians “Nazarenes”?
Location of the Early Church: Another Look at Ephesus, Smyrna, and Rome What actually happened to the primitive Church? And did the Bible tell about this in advance?
Apostolic Succession What really happened? Did structure and beliefs change? Are many of the widely-held current understandings of this even possible? Did you know that Catholic scholars really do not believe that several of the claimed “apostolic sees” of the Orthodox have apostolic succession–despite the fact that the current pontiff himself seems to wish to ignore this view? Is there actually a true church that has ties to any of the apostles that is not part of the Catholic or Orthodox churches? Read this article if you truly are interested in the truth on this matter! Here is a link to a sermon: Claims of Apostolic Succession. Here is a related article in the Spanish language La sucesión apostólica. ¿Ocurrió en Roma, Alejandría, Constantinopla, Antioquía, Jerusalén o Asia Menor?
Early Church History: Who Were the Two Major Groups that Professed Christ in the Second and Third Centuries? Did you know that many in the second and third centuries felt that there were two major, and separate, professing Christian groups in the second century, but that those in the majority churches tend to now blend the groups together and claim “saints” from both? “Saints” that condemn some of their current beliefs. Who are the two groups? A related sermon is also available Christianity: Two groups.
Where is the True Christian Church Today? This free online pdf booklet answers that question and includes 18 proofs, clues, and signs to identify the true vs. false Christian church. Plus 7 proofs, clues, and signs to help identify Laodicean churches. A related sermon is also available: Where is the True Christian Church? Here is a link to the booklet in the Spanish language: ¿Dónde está la verdadera Iglesia cristiana de hoy? Here is a link in the German language: WO IST DIE WAHRE CHRISTLICHE KIRCHE HEUTE?
Laying on of Hands Succession and List Does the Church of God have laying on of hands succession? Does the Continuing Church of God have a list of leaders from the time of the apostles? Here is a link to a related sermon: Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession.
Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.
The History of Early Christianity Are you aware that what most people believe is not what truly happened to the true Christian church? Do you know where the early church was based? Do you know what were the doctrines of the early church? Is your faith really based upon the truth or compromise?

COGwriter

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

Bruce Renehan

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[iii] Brackney, p. 6

[iv] Ball, p. 102

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

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

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

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

Colosseum of Rome (Photo by Joyce Thiel)

COGwriter

Ran across the following on a Roman Catholic website:

Catholic Church

Founded by Christ, propagated by His apostles, from Jerusalem through Asia Minor to Rome as its permanent world center, from which it spread throughout the world according to the mandate of its Divine Founder:

Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Matthew 28). (Catholic Church. Star Quest Production Network, Priest Roderick Vonhögen – Chief Executive Officer. http://saints.sqpn.com/catholic-church/)

Now, it is absolutely certain that the Church founded by Jesus began in Jerusalem as Acts 1 and 2 show. It is also absolutely certain that the apostles went from Jerusalem via Antioch to Asia Minor. BUT while it is true that the Apostle Paul went to Rome, there was no type of mandate that Rome would be its “permanent world center.”

Notice what Jesus taught in Matthew and Paul taught in Hebrews using the Rheims New Testament and the New Jerusalem Bible (both are approved Catholic versions/translations of the Bible):

22…and you shall be odious to all men for my name, but he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved. 23 And when they shall persecute you in this city, flee into another (Matthew 10:22-23, RNT).

²² You will be universally hated on account of my name; but anyone who stands firm to the end will be saved. ²³ If they persecute you in one town, take refuge in the next; and if they persecute you in that, take refuge in another. In truth I tell you, you will not have gone the round of the towns of Israel before the Son of man comes. (Matthew 10:22-23, NJB)

14 For we have not here a permanent city: but we seek that which is to come (Hebrews 13:14, RNT).

14 There is no permanent city for us here; we are looking for the one which is yet to be. (Hebrews 13:14, NJB).

Thus, to claim that a city such as Rome could possibly be the “Eternal City” for Christians is to go against scripture as even Catholic renderings of scripture effectively prove that no single city, including Rome, could have remained the headquarters of Christendom for nearly 2000 years, if people are willing to actually believe what is written in the Bible.

Furthermore, it should be mentioned if there was to be one city from the beginning to the end, it likely would have had to be Jerusalem (cf. Revelation 21:2) as the Christian church began there (Acts 2) according to Roman Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, and Church of God scholars.

What about the claim that the Church of God in Rome was originally founded by Peter and Paul (which is what Irenaeus falsely suggested in the late second century)? Notice this comment from a Roman Catholic priest and scholar about Irenaeus, Peter, Paul, and Rome:

Irenaeus focuses on the church of Rome which he describes as “greatest, most ancient and known to all, founded and established by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul.” Here we must acknowledge a bit of rhetoric, as the church of Rome was obviously not so ancient as those of Jerusalem or Antioch, nor was it actually founded by Peter or Paul (Sullivan F.A. From Apostles to Bishops: the development of the episcopacy in the early church. Newman Press, Mahwah (NJ), 2001, p. 147).

The Catholic Encyclopedia also agrees with F.A. Sullivan here (and not Irenaeus) as it states this about Paul’s epistle to the Romans:

Paul would have worded his Epistle otherwise, if the community addressed were even mediately indebted to his apostolate (Merk A. Transcribed by W.G. Kofron. Epistle to the Romans. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XIII. Copyright © 1912 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, February 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, D.D., Censor Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

Furthermore, the Bible clearly agrees with The Catholic Encyclopedia, and F.A. Sullivan here. The Bible shows that Paul did not start the Church in Rome–thus the apostolic tradition that Irenaeus relied on is a fraudulent one–as it is not true–it is a myth. For here is what Paul wrote to the church at Rome:

20. And I have so preached this Gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another mans foundation:
21. But as it is written, They to whom it hath not been preached of him, shall see: and they that have not heard, shall understand.
22. For the which cause also I was hindered very much from coming unto you (Romans 15:20-22, Rheims NT of 1582).

There is no way that Paul could have written the above if he considered that he founded or co-founded the church in Rome as in these verses he explains that he did not first come to Rome lest he build on another man’s foundation. (Note: I choose to use the Rheims New Testament of 1582 A.D. as this is considered to be the Catholic standard English translation of the New Testament).

Catholic scholar F.A. Sullivan also further agrees, as he wrote:

…it doesn’t appear that Paul ever appointed any one person as “resident bishop” over any of his churches…(Sullivan F.A. From Apostles to Bishops: the development of the episcopacy in the early church. Newman Press, Mahwah (NJ), 2001, p. 35).

Admittedly the Catholic position, that bishops are the successors of the apostles by divine institution, remains far from easy to establish…The first problem has to do with the notion that Christ ordained apostles as bishops…The apostles were missionaries and founders of churches; there is no evidence, nor is it at all likely, that any one of them ever took up permanent residence in a particular church as its bishop…The letter of the Romans to the Corinthians, known as I Clement, which dates to about the year 96, provides good evidence that about 30 years after the death of St. Paul the church of Corinth was being led by a group of presbyters, with no indication of a bishop with authority over the whole local church…Most scholars are of the opinion that the church of Rome would most probably have also been led at that time by a group of presbyters…There exists a broad consensus among scholars, including most Catholic ones, that such churches as Alexandria, Philippi, Corinth and Rome most probably continued to be led for some time by a college of presbyters, and that only in the second century did the threefold structure of become generally the rule, with a bishop, assisted by presbyters, presiding over each local church (Sullivan F.A. From Apostles to Bishops: the development of the episcopacy in the early church. Newman Press, Mahwah (NJ), 2001, pp. 13,14,15).

And that is certainly correct concerning Rome. There were no “bishops of Rome” in the first century and certain Roman Catholic scholars understand this, hence the idea that there is an unbroken line of bishops in apostolic succession from Rome and Rome being the “permanent world center” for the true Church is false (more information can be found in the article Apostolic Succession).

And as far as getting the gospel out to the world as a witness is concerned, the true church was not limited to Asia Minor. True churches were spread throughout many lands, such as northern Italy, France, Britain, Scotland, Ireland, Antioch, and elsewhere.

And where did those churches come from? Well, logically, they did not come from Rome, but from the Smyrnaeans (an earlier Church era) in Asia Minor and Palestine. According to A.N. Dugger, Dr. T.V. Moore noted:

“The type of Christianity which first was favored, then raised to leadership by Constantine was that of the Roman Papacy. But this was not the type of Christianity that first penetrated Syria, northern Italy, southern France, and Great Britain. The ancient records of the first believers in Christ in those parts, disclose a Christianity which is not Roman but apostolic. These lands were first penetrated by missionaries, not from Rome, but from Palestine and Asia Minor. And the Greek New Testament, the Received Text, they brought with them, or its translation, was of the type from which the Protestant Bibles, as the King James in the English, and the Lutheran in German, were translated.” — Dr. T. V. Moore, The Culdee Church, chapters 3 and 4, and Wilkinson, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, pp. 25, 26 (As cited in Dugger AN, Dodd CO. A History of True Religion, 3rd ed. Jerusalem, 1972 (Church of God, 7th Day). 1990 reprint, pp. 90-91).

So, it was Asia Minor, and not Rome that was the main location of the true Church of God in the first and second centuries, and even into the third century. And while a confederation involving Rome rose up in the second through fourth centuries, it ended up changing doctrines and not holding to original Christianity in many ways.

To know more about original beliefs, check out the free online book: Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?

Did you know that it was the written position of late 20th century Cardinal Jean-Guenolé-Marie Daniélou that church history has generally been mistaught and missed many aspects of what he called Jewish Christianity? He specifically wrote that this has led to a “false picture of Christian history” (Daniélou J, Cardinal. The Theology of Jewish Christianity. Translated by John A. Baker. The Westminster Press, 1964, Philadelphia, p. 2). He is right about that.

Most people, Roman Catholic or otherwise, simply do not know enough about the real truth about early church history. But they can if they are willing to look at the truth of what really happened. Here is a link to a free online pdf booklet: Continuing History of the Church of God.

As far as Protestants go, they may wish to read the free online pdf booklet: Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God differs from most Protestants.

Some items documenting these and other items of possibly related interest include the following:

What Do Roman Catholic Scholars Actually Teach About Early Church History? Although most believe that the Roman Catholic Church history teaches an unbroken line of succession of bishops beginning with Peter, with stories about most of them, Roman Catholic scholars know the truth of this matter. Is telling the truth about the early church citing Catholic accepted sources anti-Catholic? This eye-opening article is a must-read for any who really wants to know what Roman Catholic history actually admits about the early church. There is also a YouTube sermon on the subject titled Church of God or Church of Rome: What Do Catholic Scholars Admit About Early Church History?
Which Is Faithful: The Roman Catholic Church or the Continuing Church of God? Do you know that both groups shared a lot of the earliest teachings? Do you know which church changed? Do you know which group is most faithful to the teachings of the apostolic church? Which group best represents true Christianity? This documented article answers those questions.
Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.
Nazarene Christianity: Were the Original Christians Nazarenes? Who were the Nazarene Christians? What did they believe? Should 21st century Christians be modern Nazarenes? Is there a group that exists now that traces its history through the Nazarenes and holds the same beliefs today? Here is a link to a related video sermon Nazarene Christians: Were the early Christians “Nazarenes”?
Location of the Early Church: Another Look at Ephesus, Smyrna, and Rome What actually happened to the primitive Church? And did the Bible tell about this in advance?
1. The Ephesus Church Era was predominant from 31 A.D. to circa 135 A.D. The Church of James, Peter, Paul, and John, etc. Here is a link to a related video sermon: Ephesus Church Era.
2. The Smyrna Church Era was predominant circa 135 A.D. to circa 450 A.D. The Church led by Polycarp, Melito, Polycrates, etc.Here is a link to a related video sermon: The Smyrna Church Era.
3. The Pergamos Church Era was predominant circa 450 A.D. to circa 1050 A.D. An especially persecuted Church. Here is a link to a related sermon video: Pergamos Era and the Antichrist.
4. The Thyatira Church Era was predominant circa 1050 A.D. to circa 1600 A.D. The Church during the Inquisition. It claimed succession from the apostles. Here is a link toa related sermon: Thyatira, Succession, and Jezebel.
5. The Sardis Church Era was predominant circa 1600 A.D. to circa 1933 A.D. Discusses some early history of the Seventh Day Baptists, Seventh-day Adventists, CG7-Salem, Jerusalem 7DCG, and COG-7th Day-Denver. Here are two historical sermons: Sardis Church Era: Beginnings, Doctrines, and Leaders and Sardis: SDBs, SDAs, & CG7s.
6. The Philadelphia Church Era was predominant circa 1933 A.D. to 1986 A.D. The old Radio Church of God and old Worldwide Church of God, now the remnant of that era is basically the most faithful in the Church of God, like who hold to the beliefs and practices of the Continuing Church of God.
7. The Laodicean Church Era has been predominant circa 1986 A.D. to present. The Laodiceans are non-Philadelphians who mainly descended from the old WCG or its offshoots.  They do not properly understand the work or biblical prophecies and will face the Great Tribulation if they do not repent.
Laying on of Hands Succession and List Does the Church of God have laying on of hands succession? Does the Continuing Church of God have a list of leaders from the time of the apostles? Here is a link to a related sermon: Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession.
Was Peter the Rock Who Alone Received the Keys of the Kingdom? How should Matthew 16:18-19 be understood? Here is a link to a related sermon: Peter, the Rock, and the Keys.
The Apostle Peter He was an original apostle and early Christian leader. Where was Peter buried? Where did Peter die?
The Apostle Paul He was a later apostle, but also an early Christian leader. Here is a link to a related sermon: Paul: Apostle to the Gentiles.
The Apostle John He was an original apostle, early Christian leader, and the last of the original apostles to die. Here is a link to a related sermon titled Apostle John: The Disciple that Jesus Loved.
Laying on of Hands This is an elementary principle of Hebrews 6. Have you properly had hands laid upon you? Here is a link to a related sermon: Laying on of Hands and Succession.
Apostolic Succession What really happened? Did structure and beliefs change? Are many of the widely-held current understandings of this even possible? Did you know that Catholic scholars really do not believe that several of the claimed “apostolic sees” of the Orthodox have apostolic succession–despite the fact that the current pontiff himself seems to wish to ignore this view? Is there actually a true church that has ties to any of the apostles that is not part of the Catholic or Orthodox churches? Read this article if you truly are interested in the truth on this matter! Here is a link to a sermon: Claims of Apostolic Succession. Here is a related articlein the Spanish language La sucesión apostólica. ¿Ocurrió en Roma, Alejandría, Constantinopla, Antioquía, Jerusalén o Asia Menor?
Early Church History: Who Were the Two Major Groups that Professed Christ in the Second and Third Centuries? Did you know that many in the second and third centuries felt that there were two major, and separate, professing Christian groups in the second century, but that those in the majority churches tend to now blend the groups together and claim “saints” from both? “Saints” that condemn some of their current beliefs. Who are the two groups? A related sermon is also available Christianity: Two groups.
Where is the True Christian Church Today? This free online pdf booklet answers that question and includes 18 proofs, clues, and signs to identify the true vs. false Christian church. Plus 7 proofs, clues, and signs to help identify Laodicean churches. A related sermon is also available: Where is the True Christian Church? Here is a link to the booklet in the Spanish language: ¿Dónde está la verdadera Iglesia cristiana de hoy? Here is a link in the German language: WO IST DIE WAHRE CHRISTLICHE KIRCHE HEUTE? Here is a link in the French language: Où est la vraie Église Chrétienne aujourd’hui?
Continuing History of the Church of God This pdf booklet is a historical overview of the true Church of God and some of its main opponents from Acts 2 to the 21st century. Related sermon links include Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D. and Continuing History of the Church of God: 4th-16th Centuries and Continuing History of the Church of God: 17th-20th Centuries. The booklet is available in Spanish: Continuación de la Historia de la Iglesia de Dios, German: Kontinuierliche Geschichte der Kirche Gottes, French: L’Histoire Continue de l’Église de Dieu and Ekegusii Omogano Bw’ekanisa Ya Nyasae Egendererete.
Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism The CCOG is NOT Protestant. This free online book explains how the real Church of God differs from mainstream/traditional Protestants. Several sermons related to the free book are also available: Protestant, Baptist, and CCOG History; The First Protestant, God’s Command, Grace, & Character; The New Testament, Martin Luther, and the Canon; Eucharist, Passover, and Easter; Views of Jews, Lost Tribes, Warfare, & Baptism; Scripture vs. Tradition, Sabbath vs. Sunday; Church Services, Sunday, Heaven, and God’s Plan; Seventh Day Baptists/Adventists/Messianics: Protestant or COG?; Millennial Kingdom of God and God’s Plan of Salvation; Crosses, Trees, Tithes, and Unclean Meats; The Godhead and the Trinity; Fleeing or Rapture?; and Ecumenism, Rome, and CCOG Differences.
The History of Early Christianity Are you aware that what most people believe is not what truly happened to the true Christian church? Do you know where the early church was based? Do you know what were the doctrines of the early church? Is your faith really based upon the truth or compromise?

4th century depiction of warring sun god Mithras
(photo by dynamosquito from France)

COGwriter

Our Sunday Visitor put up the following by a Roman Catholic apologist named Jimmy Akin:

Dispelling some common myths about Christmas

Every year, various myths about Christmas circulate. …

One of the most common ideas is that Christmas is based on a pagan holiday, so it’s really “pagan” in origin. 12/08/22 https://www.oursundayvisitor.com/dispelling-some-common-myths-about-christmas/

Well, the fact is that it is pagan in origin.

Christians should not follow myths that try to say otherwise.

The Apostle Peter stated:

16 When we told you about the power and the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, we were not slavishly repeating cleverly invented myths; no, we had seen his majesty with our own eyes. (2 Peter 1:16, NJB–a Roman Catholic translation)

Plus December 25th was not adopted by the church of Rome until the 4th century.

The Catholic Encyclopedia teaches that:

Christmas was not among the earliest festivals of the Church … Christmas … Irenaeus and Tertullian omit it from their lists of feasts; Origen, glancing perhaps at the discreditable imperial Natalitia, asserts (in Lev. Hom. viii in Migne, P.G., XII, 495) that in the Scriptures sinners alone, not saints, celebrate their birthday; Arnobius (VII, 32 in P.L., V, 1264) can still ridicule the “birthdays” of the gods. (Martindale C. Transcribed by Susanti A. Suastika. Christmas. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume III. Copyright © 1908 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, November 1, 1908. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

The above is true.

The World Book Encyclopedia notes:

In 354 A.D., Bishop Liberius of Rome ordered the people to celebrate on December 25. He probably chose this date because the people of Rome already observed it as the Feast of Saturn, celebrating the birthday of the sun (Sechrist E.H. Christmas. World Book Encyclopedia, Volume 3. Field Enterprises Educational Corporation, Chicago, 1966, pp. 408-417).

It needs to be understood that some scholarly sources believe that the celebration in Rome of Christmas may have begun a couple of decades earlier (by Constantine), but none I am aware of suggest it was prior Constantine in the fourth century.

Jimmy Akin further wrote:

It’s sometimes claimed that Jesus couldn’t have been born on Dec. 25 because Luke reports that shepherds were tending their flocks the night Jesus was born (cf. 2:8). It would have been too cold for that in December, so Jesus must have been born in a warmer time of year.

This is nonsense.

Well, according to The Catholic Encyclopedia that is not nonsense as it states:

Authorities moreover differ as to whether shepherds could or would keep flocks exposed during the nights of the rainy season. (Martindale, Christmas)

While it is not impossible for shepherds to be in the field at night in late December, that was not their ancient practice. Normally, shepherds stopped spending the night with their flocks outside during the Fall because of cold and rain. The Catholic Encyclopedia seems to recognize this.

December 25th is impossible, as The Catholic Encyclopedia admits:

The Gospels. Concerning the date of Christ’s birth the Gospels give no help; upon their data contradictory arguments are based. The census would have been impossible in winter: a whole population could not then be put in motion…

If something is impossible, then it did not happen.

Jimmy Akin further wrote:

What about the claim that celebrating Christmas on Dec. 25 is based on a pagan holiday?

Even if that were true, so what?

So what? The Bible opposes pagan practices.

Notice something that Nehemiah declared:

30 I cleansed them of everything pagan (Nehemiah 13:30)

Christians should follow Nehemiah’s example and not participate in pagan practices.

Jesus taught (note: scriptures in this post here were translated by Roman Catholic scholars):

24 God is spirit, and those who worship must worship in spirit and truth. (John 4:24, NJB)

7 And in vain to they worship me, teaching doctrines and precepts of men. (Mark 7:7, DRB)

Of course, it is vain and bearing false witness to deceive children about Santa Claus.

There is a right way and a wrong way to live and worship God–do not base this on your emotional feelings about what is right:

8 ‘You must not behave as we are behaving here today, each of you doing what he himself sees fit, (Deuteronomy 12:8, NJB)

²⁹ ‘When Yahweh your God has annihilated the nations confronting you, whom you are going to dispossess, and when you have dispossessed them and made your home in their country,

³⁰ beware of being entrapped into copying them, after they have been destroyed to make way for you, and do not enquire about their gods, saying, “How did these nations worship their gods? I am going to do the same too.”

³¹ This is not the way to treat Yahweh your God. For in honour of their gods they have done everything detestable that Yahweh hates; (Deuteronomy 12:29-31a, NJB)

32 What I command thee, that only do thou to the Lord: neither add any thing, nor diminish. (Deuteronomy 12:32, DRB)

God did not command keeping Christmas; pagans came up with it.

Consider something that the Apostle Paul wrote:

¹⁷ So this I say to you and attest to you in the Lord, do not go on living the empty-headed life that the gentiles live. ¹⁸ Intellectually they are in the dark, and they are estranged from the life of God, because of the ignorance which is the consequence of closed minds. ¹⁹ Their sense of right and wrong once dulled, they have abandoned all self-control and pursue to excess every kind of uncleanness.

²⁰ Now that is hardly the way you have learnt Christ, ²¹ unless you failed to hear him properly when you were taught what the truth is in Jesus. ²² You were to put aside your old self, which belongs to your old way of life and is corrupted by following illusory desires. (Ephesians 4:17-22, NJB)

Christians are to put off pagan ways, and live according to the truth, not longing for improper traditions.

The Apostle Paul further wrote:

19 What then? Do I say, that what is offered in sacrifice to idols, is any thing ? Or, that the idol is any thing?

20 But the things which the heathens sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God. And I would not that you should be made partakers with devils.

21 You cannot drink the chalice of the Lord, and the chalice of devils: you cannot be partakers of the table of the Lord, and of the table of devils. (1 Corinthians 10:19-21, DRB)

To further answer Jimmy Akin’s “so what?,” the Bible says we are not to adopt pagan practices, which the Apostle Paul says are from devils.

Jimmy Akin further wrote:

Some sources link Christmas with the Roman holiday Saturnalia, which was a festival in honor of the god Saturn. …

But there is a major problem claiming that Christmas is an alternative to Saturnalia. This Roman festival was originally celebrated Dec. 17, though by the time of the Republic it extended through Dec. 23. So, Christmas wasn’t held until after Saturnalia was over.

First, consider that there are normally many Christmas parties before December 25th.

Second, consider that many customs of Saturnalia are part of Christmas celebrations.

And third, notice something from a then Roman Catholic scholar named Tertullian in the early 3rd century:

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

Around the time of Tertullian, the Roman Bishops Zephyrinus (199-217) and Callistus (217-222) had a reputation of compromise and corruption (and this is confirmed by such Roman Catholic saints such as Hippolytus) and allowed people in their church that compromised with paganism, etc.

So, notice what else Tertullian wrote:

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

The scripture Tertullian seems to be referring to is 1 Timothy 6:1:

1 Whosoever are servants under the yoke, let them count their masters worthy of all honour; lest the name of the Lord and his doctrine be blasphemed. DRB

But, as even he alluded to, that should not have been an excuse to celebrate pagan days. Notice that it would be false teachers that would get the way of truth blasphemed:

1 But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there shall be among you lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition, and deny the Lord who bought them: bringing upon themselves swift destruction. 2 And many shall follow their riotousnesses, through whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. 3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you. Whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their perdition slumbereth not. (2 Peter 2:1-3, DRB)

So following covetous, false teachings is really what causes the way of truth to be blasphemed.

Getting back to Tertullian, he wrote:

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

What Tertullian seems to be saying is that observing mid-winter celebrations make Christians appear to be followers of pagan gods–even more so than the pagans themselves–and since the pagans would not intentionally celebrate days considered by many to be Christian, Christians should not celebrate days that are honored by the heathen. Specifically, he felt that those who profess Christ should not celebrate Saturnalia, New Year’s, or other pagan days, as even the observance is a form of idolatry (click here for an article titled Is January 1st a Date for Christians Celebrate?).

Notice that he was also pointing out that his ‘Christians’ even used laurel wreaths and lights more than the heathen. Even The Catholic Encyclopedia says of them that they have pre-Christian origin, that Tertullian considered them pagan.

Notice that they were in widespread use, however, by the time of the late 4th century Bishop of Consantinople, John Chrysostom:

A wreath of flowers or evergreens formerly used in connection with baptismal, nuptial, and funeral rites, as well as in solemn processions.

The bridal crown or wreath is said to be of pre-Christian Greek origin, adopted later by the Romans. Tertullian refers to it as a sign of paganism, but this prejudice was afterwards set aside, and it was in common use among Christians by the time of St. John Chrysostom … (Alston, George Cyprian. “Garland.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 6. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1909).

Notice also the following:

Roman ‘Christmases’ were similar to ours

The Romans celebrated the winter festival of Sigillaria on 23rd of December, part of their Saturnalia festivities. Just like on Christmas Day, Sigillaria saw presents exchanged.

Saturnalia began in the very early history of Rome. It was a festival devoted to the god Saturn … The popularity of Saturnalia continued into the 3rd and 4th centuries until it was supplanted by the Christian festival of Christmas …

“Just like our festive season, it seems that the whole of Rome geared up early for Sigillaria. Seneca noted: ‘It is now the month of December, when the greatest part of the city is in a bustle. Loose reins are given to public dissipation; everywhere you may hear the sound of great preparations’. (Ep. 18.1).” (Roman ‘Christmases’ were similar to ours. December 23, 2013 http://phys.org/news/2013-12-roman-christmases-similar.html viewed 12/30/13)

Since the modern Christmas celebration is at the same time as the old Gentile Saturnalia holiday (and with many of the same elements, like wreaths and gift-giving), it is clear that Tertullian is condemning these practices by stating that those that keep it are of the pagan god Saturn.

Tertullian also wrote against winter giving:

… gifts like those you have in the Saturnalia! (Tertullian. De Fuga in Persecutione, Chapter 13. Excerpted from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 4. Edited by Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson. American Edition, 1885. Online Edition Copyright © 2004 by K. Knight).

So basically, those who teach “Jesus is the reason for the season” are in error. Those who professed Christ and observed these pagan holidays did not attempt to pretend that they were celebrating “Christmas” then (that term was not developed until centuries later). The initial reason for the season appears to be that many of those who somewhat professed Christ wanted to have a party. And they did not care if the party was related to pagan gods.

It is interesting to note that Tertullian objected to keeping a celebration lasting until the Roman New Years, putting up wreaths, and giving gifts. Since most of these quotes come from his writing titles “On Idolatry” apparently he considered those practices as idolatrous.

It seems to me that no true Christians would do this, only those who were somewhat nominal, but who had been accepted, to some degree, by part of the Greco-Roman confederation. Tertullian’s complaints apparently did not stop this from happening, though his objections certainly have biblical support.

Notice something that John Chrysostom wrote in the fourth century condemning paganism:

And what, pray you, is that Minerva of theirs, and Apollo, and Juno? They are different kinds of demons among them. (Chrysostom J. The homilies of S. John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople: on the Acts of the Apostles, Volume 1, Homily IV. John Henry Parker, 1851. Original from Harvard University. Digitized, Apr 12, 2008, p. 66)

Notice that, like Tertullian, John Chrysostom associated paganism with demons.

Yet, ‘venerable’ Cesare Baronius, a Roman Catholic of the 16th century, wrote:

If the candles which were formerly distributed at the Saturnalia are now identified with the feast of the Purification of our Lady? What, I ask, is there so surprising if holy bishops have allowed certain customs firmly rooted among pagan peoples, and so tenaciously adhered to by them that even after their conversion to Christianity they could not be induced to surrender them, to be transferred to the worship of the true God?” (Baronius, “Annales”, ad ann. 58, n. 77). (as cited in Thurston, Herbert. “Lights.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 9. Nihil Obstat.October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1910.21 Dec. 2009 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09244b.htm>)

Thus, Baronius seems to be saying that Saturnalia lights are a pagan practice, yet using them is acceptable.

But even the Rheims‘ version of the New Testament (a Catholic approved translation) states the following:

15. And what agreement with Christ and Belial? or what part hath the faithful with the infidel? 16. And what agreement hath the temple of God with Idols? For you are the temple of the living God. as God saith, Then I will dwell, and walk in them, and will be their God: and they shall be my people. 17. For the which cause, Go out of the midst of them, and separate yourselves. saith our Lord, and touch not the unclean: and I will receive you (2 Corinthians 6:15-17, The Original And True Rheims New Testament Of Anno Domini 1582. Prepared and Edited by Dr. William von Peters, Ph.D. Copyright © 1998, Dr. William G. von Peters. Ph.D. 2004, copyright assigned to VSC Corp.).

So unclean practices associated with idols are prohibited by God. Does not that include celebrating as the idolaters celebrate?

The Roman Saturnalia and the Persian Mithraism themselves were adaptations of an even earlier pagan religion – that of the ancient Babylonian mystery cult. The ancient Babylonians celebrated the reborn Nimrod as the newborn Tammuz by worshipping an evergreen tree. The Babylonians also celebrated this rebirth during the season of the winter solstice. Jeremiah condemns ancient Israel for copying this type of paganism, and and condemned the the pagan use of trees in Jeremiah 10:2-4 and the evergreen tree in Jeremiah 3:13.

To take this a step further, notice that using trees as part of worship was condemned by God thousands of years ago:

2 ‘You must completely destroy all the places where the nations you dispossess have served their gods, on high mountains, on hills, under any spreading tree; 3 you must tear down their altars, smash their sacred stones, burn their sacred poles, hack to bits the statues of their gods and obliterate their name from that place. (Deuteronomy 12:2-3, New Jerusalem Bible, NJB, a Catholic translation)

2 Destroy all the places in which the nations, that you shall possess, worshipped their gods upon high mountains, and hills, and under every shady tree: 3 Overthrow their altars, and break down their statues, burn their groves with fire, and break their idols in pieces: destroy their names out of those places. 4 You shall not do so to the Lord your God (Deuteronomy 12:2-4, Douay OT, DOT, a Catholic translation).

16 Beware lest perhaps your heart be deceived, and you depart from our Lord, and serve strange Gods, and adore them (Deuteronomy 11:16, DOT).

9 When thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God shall give thee, beware lest thou have a mind to imitate the abominations of those nations…12 For the Lord abhorreth all these things, and for these abominations he will destroy them at thy coming. (Deuteronomy 18:9,12, DOT)

Roman Catholic translations of the Bible show that spreading shady trees, like evergreens, were not to be part of the worship of the true God–and that people should not be deceived and serve such strange practice or other pagan practices. The truth is that Christmas reminds us that people are often unwilling to worship God as He intended, but instead often prefer pagan substitutes that they rationalize as somehow acceptable if they pretend the holiday is about Jesus.

Those who truly believe Jesus’ words, “Human beings live not on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4, NJB) will not celebrate a compromised pagan holiday such as Christmas because it contains practices and symbols (see also What Did the Early Church Teach About Idols and Icons?) warned against in the Bible and was never enjoined upon true believers to practice.

Apparently the practice of ‘Christmas caroling’ also has its origins in Saturnalia:

In ancient Babylon, the feast of the Son of Isis (Goddess of Nature) was celebrated on December 25. Raucous partying, gluttonous eating and drinking, and gift-giving were traditions of this feast.

In Rome, the Winter Solstice was celebrated many years before the birth of Christ. The Romans called their winter holiday Saturnalia, honoring Saturn, the God of Agriculture. In January, they observed the Kalends of January, which represented the triumph of life over death. This whole season was called Dies Natalis Invicti Solis, the Birthday of the Unconquered Sun. The festival season was marked by much merrymaking. It is in ancient Rome that the tradition of the Mummers was born. The Mummers were groups of costumed singers and dancers who traveled from house to house entertaining their neighbors. From this, the Christmas tradition of caroling was born. In northern Europe, many other traditions that we now consider part of Christian worship were begun long before the participants had ever heard of Christ. The pagans of northern Europe celebrated the their own winter solstice, known as Yule. Yule was symbolic of the pagan Sun God, Mithras, being born … http://www.essortment.com/christmas-pagan-origins-42543.html

Many practices that people associate with Christmas came from pagan holidays. (For more on Mummers, please see Canadian & Philadelphian Mummers Parades: Another tie to Saturnalia.)

The “twelve days of Christmas” originally came from the 12 days of Yuletide which began at sunset on December 20, known as Mother Night, and ended on the night of December 31, the Night of the Oak King and the Roman day of Hecate. The dates were later moved by those who keep Christmas.

Yuletide is perhaps the greatest of all Heathen holidays. It is a time of celebration and close family contact that lasts twelve days and nights; each of which can be viewed as a month of the preceding year in miniature. Many of the customs associated with Christmas actually began from Heathen Yule rites and customs. Many Gods and Goddesses are honored during Yuletide and most Asatruar believe that they, as well as the spirits of the earth and our ancestors, all join us for the celebrations. All are our kith and kin, after all.

There are many traditions and practices that are traditional to the month of Yule the most well known is of course the 12 days of Yule. Some Heathens may simply bookend Yule with Mother’s Night and Twelfth Night and not have specific observances in-between those days, there are some other Heathens who have taken things a step further. Pulling inspiration from the Nine Noble Virtues, and combining it with candle-lighting celebrations like Chanukah or Kwanzaa, they have come up with a reason to light a candle every night during the Yuletide.

The alter {sic} on Yule should face north, the area is decorated with Holly and Mistletoe and dried leaves and fruit such as Hips and Haw. A chalice of appropriate wine, mead or cider. The Oak or Pine log with up to 13 green, white and red candles decorated with carvings, runes or symbols is placed centrally on the altar. (12 Nights of Yule. Nordic Wiccan, December 5, 2014. http://nordicwiccan.blogspot.com/2014/12/12-days-of-yule.html)

Faithful early Christians were not keeping the twelve days of Yuletide–MANY OF WHICH PRACTICED COINCIDED WITH SATURNALIA.

Jimmy Akin further wrote:

Today, many authors link Christmas with the birthday of Sol Invictus — that is, the sun god Sol, who was nicknamed Invictus or “the Unconquerable.” This was celebrated on Dec. 25.

But we have no early Christian sources saying, “We decided to celebrate Christmas on Dec. 25 to compete with Sol Invictus.” That means that the idea is sheer speculation, not something that we have evidence for.

It’s not even good speculation, because the only thing the two celebrations have in common is the date, but that doesn’t mean one is based on the other.

First it needs to be understood that Sol Invictus is Mithra–the sun god worshiped by Emperor Constanine.

Roman Mithras is the invincible sun-god, Sol Invictus. This is the burden, repeated a hundred times over, of the votive inscriptions from the second to the fourth centuries AD, whether in the form Sol Invictus Mithras, or Deus Sol Invictus Mithras, or Deus Sol Mithras, or Sol Mithras. There do not seem to be any significant regional or temporal variations among such formulae. In the very earliest epigraphic evidence for the Roman cult of Mithras, the god is already invoked as Sol Invictus Mithras. These facts are confirmed by the numerous votive offerings to Sol, Deus Sol, Sol Invictus, and Deus Invictus Sol which were put up in mithraea.  (Clauss M. The Roman cult of Mithras. Taylor and Francis, 2017, p. 117)

Many Roman Catholic authors rightly connect Sol Invictus–Mithra–with Christmas being December 25th.

Notice the following from The Catholic Encyclopedia:

Constantine the Great… Constantine can rightfully claim the title of Great, for he turned the history of the world into a new course and made Christianity…the religion of the State… it is easy to understand that many of the emperors yielded to the delusion that they could unite all their subjects in the adoration of the one sun-god who combined in himself the Father-God of the Christians and the much-worshipped Mithras; thus the empire could be founded anew on unity of religion. Even Constantine…cherished this mistaken belief… Could not Sol Deus Invictus, to whom even Constantine dedicated his coins for a long time, or Sol Mithras Deus Invictus, venerated by Diocletian and Galerius, become the supreme god of the empire?  Constantine may have pondered over this. Nor had he absolutely rejected the thought even after a miraculous event had strongly influenced him in favour of the God of the Christians… It is true that the believers in Mithras also observed Sunday as well as Christmas. Consequently Constantine speaks not of the day of the Lord, but of the everlasting day of the sun.  (Herbermann C., Georg Gp. Constantine the Great. The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 4. Nihil Obstat. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.  New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1908).

Mithraism A pagan religion consisting mainly of the cult of the ancient Indo-Iranian Sun-god Mithra. It entered Europe from Asia Minor after Alexander’s conquest, spread rapidly over the whole Roman Empire at the beginning of our era, reached its zenith during the third century, and vanished under the repressive regulations of Theodosius at the end of the fourth century…Helios Mithras is one god…Sunday was kept holy in honour of Mithra, and the sixteenth of each month was sacred to him as mediator. The 25 December was observed as his birthday, the natalis invicti, the rebirth of the winter-sun, unconquered by the rigours of the season (Arendzen J. Mithraism. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume X. Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911).

The birthday of the sun god Mithras was what Constantine observed and he wanted his followers to observe. And it ended up getting officially adopted by the Greco-Roman bishops.

Emperor Constantine became a highly devout follower of the sun-god after he said he saw an apparition of the sun god Sol in a grove of Apollo in Gaul in 310 (discussed in Rodgers, Barbara S. “Constantine’s Pagan Vision,”Byzantion, vol. 50, 1980, pp. 259–78). He also observed the sun-god Mithras’ birthday on December 25th. He also seems to be have instrumental in getting the Greco-Romans to celebrate December 25th as Jesus’ birthday:

The first recorded date of Christmas being celebrated on December 25th was in 336AD, during the time of the Roman Emperor Constantine (he was the first Christian Roman Emperor). A few years later, Pope Julius I officially declared that the birth of Jesus would be celebrated on the 25th December. (Why is Christmas Day on the 25th December? http://www.whychristmas.com/customs/25th.shtml accessed 12/07/15)

The eventual choice of December 25, made perhaps as early as 273, reflects a convergence of Origen’s concern about pagan gods and the church’s identification of God’s son with the celestial sun. December 25 already hosted two other related festivals: natalis solis invicti (the Roman “birth of the unconquered sun”), and the birthday of Mithras, the Iranian “Sun of Righteousness” whose worship was popular with Roman soldiers. The winter solstice, another celebration of the sun, fell just a few days earlier. Seeing that pagans were already exalting deities with some parallels to the true deity, church leaders decided to commandeer the date and introduce a new festival.

Western Christians first celebrated Christmas on December 25 in 336, after Emperor Constantine had declared Christianity the empire’s favored religion. (Coffman E. Why December 25? For the church’s first three centuries, Christmas wasn’t in December—or on the calendar at all. Christianity Today, August 8, 2008. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ch/news/2000/dec08.html accessed 12/07/15)

The sun-god worshiping Emperor Constantine succeeded in getting the Greco-Romans, over time, to mainly agree with his date–the date of the rebirth of the sun-god Mithras.

Jimmy Akin wrote:

Could the fact that Dec. 25 was the winter solstice have played a role in their celebrating it as Jesus’ birth?

Yes. While Jimmy Akin elsewhere also tries to point to December 25th as having a pre-Sol Invictus origin, the reality is that December 25th was previously also tied to pagan solstice observations.

Jimmy Akin further wrote:

The calculation theory

The easiest date in Jesus’ life to calculate is the day of his death …

Just as Dec. 25 was the winter solstice, March 25 — three months later — was the spring equinox, and the timing of Passover was determined by the spring equinox.

Knowing that Jesus was crucified at Passover, it was easy for ancients to conclude he died around March 25, and that became the standard date.

Let me state that Jimmy Akin does not know the date of Jesus’ death–more on that can be found in the article What Happened in the ‘Crucifixion Week’?

As far as December 25th goes, The Catholic Encyclopedia states:

The Gospels. Concerning the date of Christ’s birth the Gospels give no help; upon their data contradictory arguments are based. The census would have been impossible in winter: a whole population could not then be put in motion…

Natalis Invicti. The well-known solar feast, however, of Natalis Invicti, celebrated on 25 December, has a strong claim on the responsibility for our December date. For the history of the solar cult, its position in the Roman Empire, and syncretism with Mithraism, see Cumont’s epoch-making “Textes et Monuments” etc., I, ii, 4, 6, p. 355…The earliest rapprochement of the births of Christ and the sun is in Cypr., “De pasch. Comp.”, xix, “O quam præclare providentia ut illo die quo natus est Sol . . . nasceretur Christus.” – “O, how wonderfully acted Providence that on that day on which that Sun was born . . . Christ should be born.”

Since the census WAS IMPOSSIBLE THEN, December 25th is not possibly the date Jesus was born.

Jimmy Akin further wrote:

Looking at the Gospels

While the calendar date of Jesus’ birth is something we cannot know definitively, the Gospels present us with solid information about the Nativity. …

Since Joseph’s family was from Bethlehem, he and Mary were likely staying with family. But it is also possible that there were so many family members visiting for Caesar’s enrollment (cf. Lk 2:1) that the living area was full, and so Mary chose to give birth in another part of the house.

Family rooms were on an upper floor, so Mary would have gone to the lower part of the house, which is where animals were kept, as indicated by the presence of the manger.

What kind of animals were they? We cannot say, though cows, sheep, and goats were commonly kept. In any event, Jesus was likely born in the lower part of a house, and — most likely — in a cave.

Mithra was allegedly born in a below-ground cave, and many (contrary to logic) claim that Jesus was born in a cave–but He was not. For details, see Was Jesus Born in the Grotto of the Nativity?

Jimmy Akin further wrote:

Conclusion

There are a large number of myths about Christmas.

Yes, there are many myths. But sadly, Jimmy Akin was attempting to perpetuate many.

Jesus was not born on December 25th, early Christians did not celebrate Christmas or even birthdays.

Faithful early Christians attempted to remain separate from pagan observances.

True Christians do so until this day.

Christmas is NOT a biblical nor truly a Christ-centered holiday. It is a sentimental and commercialized, pagan tradition.

We put out the following video which scripturally deals with many of the so-called reasons that Protestants and Roman Catholics point to for observing Christmas:

1:10:57

Arguments for Christmas?

This sermon goes over four articles, two from Protestants and two from Roman Catholics, who give their reasons and arguments for why they feel that real Christians should observe the 25th of December as Christmas. The writers generally admit that Jesus was not born then, that the trappings of Christmas a pagan, the timing is pagan (it coincided with the pagan Saturnalia and the birthday of the sun god Mithras), and that Santa Claus is a lie. Dr. Thiel explains errors in their arguments, brings up scriptures, and points out the Bible enjoins God’s Holy Days, that Christmas was not one of them, and that early Christians did not observe it. Dr. Thiel explains what the word ‘Christmas’ means, when it was first used, where it comes from, and why true believers would not wish to celebrate it. He over points out that its observance distorts God’s plan and that most who observe Christmas do not understand God’s plan of salvation.

Here is a link to our video: Arguments for Christmas?

We also recently put out the following sermon-length video:

 

1:25:55

Christians say No to Christmas

Was Jesus born on the 25th of December? Can you be certain He was not? If He was not, should Christians celebrate December 25 as His birth date? Was December 25th really celebrated by pagans as the birthday of the sun-god Mithras/Natalis Invicti? Did early Christians celebrate Jesus’ birth? Are many of the traditions associated with Christmas actually pagan as associated with the Saturnalia of Roman and the Druid practices of the winter solstice? What about evergreen trees, ivy, holly, exchange of gifts, and mistletoe? Do Buddhists and Hindus uses ‘Christmas lights’ today? Was ‘Saint Nicholas’ actually happy, fat, and jolly or a brawler? Any connections between the Norse god Odin and Santa Claus? Is it right to lie to children about Santa Claus? What is the connection of eating boar (ham/pig/pork) on Christmas and ancient Nimrod? Does the Bible discourage adoption on non-biblical worship practices? What does ‘The Catholic Encyclopedia’ reveal about Christmas and its associated practices? What about Emperor Constantine picking the date in 336 A.D.? Can you be certain that December 25th was not the date of Jesus’ birth? Where are God’s Holy Days listed in the Bible? Did Jesus condemn relying on tradition over scripture for worship? Why to faithful Christians say no to Christmas? Dr. Thiel addresses these matters and also goes over a list of 25 items to consider to not celebrating Christmas?

Here is a link to our video: Christians say No to Christmas.

Christmas is a distraction from the Gospel of the Kingdom of God. It is not a Christ-centered holiday as its proponents sometimes claim.

Christmas has the wrong emphasis and is not based on truth.

The foundation of Christmas is demonic paganism and lies.

Consider something else that Jesus had recorded:

14 Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. 15 But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie. (Revelation 22:14-15)

Which are you?

One who keeps God’s commandments or one who prefers to practice the idolatrous lie of Christmas?

Should You Keep God’s Holy Days or Demonic Holidays?

Again, here is a link to our short video: 22 Points to Consider About Christmas.

Some items of possibly related interest may include:

Protestant and Roman Catholic Arguments for Christmas Various ones believe that Christians should celebrate Christmas. Do their arguments stand up to biblical or historical scrutiny? Here is a link to a related sermon: Arguments for Christmas?
What Does the Roman Catholic Church Teach About Christmas and the Holy Days? Do you know what the Catholic Church says were the original Christian holy days? Was Christmas among them? Is December 25th Jesus’ birthday or that of the sun god? Here is a link to two related sermon: 25 Reasons to Not Keep Christmas and What do Catholic and other scholars teach about Christmas?
Should You Keep God’s Holy Days or Demonic Holidays? This is a free pdf booklet explaining what the Bible and history shows about God’s Holy Days and popular holidays. A related sermon is Which Spring Days should Christians observe?
The Ten Commandments: The Decalogue, Christianity, and the Beast This is a free pdf book explaining the what the Ten Commandments are, where they came from, how early professors of Christ viewed them, and how various ones, including the Beast of Revelation, will oppose them. A related sermon is titled: The Ten Commandments and the Beast of Revelation.
What Did the Early Church Teach About Idols and Icons? Did Catholic and Orthodox “saints” endorse or condemn idols and icons for Christians? A related sermon is available: The Second Commandment, Idols, and Icons.
Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.
Why Should American Catholics Fear Unity with the Orthodox? Are the current ecumenical meetings a good thing or will they result in disaster? Is doctrinal compromise good? Here is a link to a related video Should you be concerned about the ecumenical movement?
Will the Interfaith Movement Lead to Peace or Sudden Destruction? Is the interfaith movement going to lead to lasting peace or is it warned against? A video sermon of related interest is: Will the Interfaith Movement lead to World War III? and a video sermon is also available: Do You Know That Babylon is Forming?
What Did the Early Church Teach About Idols and Icons? Did the early Church use icons? What was the position of Christians about such things? A related sermon is available: The Second Commandment, Idols, and Icons.
What is the Origin of the Cross as a ‘Christian’ Symbol? Was the cross used as a venerated symbol by the early Church? Two related YouTube videos would be Beware of the ‘Ecumenical Cross’ and Origin of the Cross.
Did the True Church Ever Teach a Trinity? Most act like this is so, but is it? Here is an old, by somewhat related, article in the Spanish language LA DOCTRINA DE LA TRINIDAD. A related sermon is available: Trinity: Fundamental to Christianity or Something Else? A brief video is also available: Three trinitarian scriptures?
Do You Practice Mithraism? Many practices and doctrines that mainstream so-called Christian groups have are the same or similar to those of the sun-god Mithras. December 25th was celebrated as his birthday. Do you follow Mithraism combined with the Bible or original Christianity? A sermon video from Vatican City is titled Church of Rome, Mithras, and Isis?
Hanukkah: Jewish Christmas and Hidden Key to Prophecy? Originally a Jewish national holiday, has Hanukkah morphed into a Jewish Christmas? Does it hold hidden secrets to prophecy? Here is a related video: Hanukkah, Tradition, and Prophecy.
Canadian & Philadelphian Mummers Parades: Another tie to Saturnalia In Canada there is a ’12 days of Christmas’ celebration involving Mummers. In Philadelphia, a parade is held on New Years. Does this come from the Bible or where?
Was Jesus Born in the Grotto of the Nativity? Was Jesus born in a below ground cave? Was Jesus born below the “Church of the Nativity”? Were the wise men there?
How did December 25th become Christmas? Was Jesus born then? If not, why December 25? Here is the article translated into Mandarin Chinese 12g25eågTf/`NHˆ«‹¸YWúwcv„OáNð€‘Ç~³v„.
Is Keeping Christmas a Sin? Is keeping Christmas acceptable for true Christians? What are some scriptures to consider?
Did Early Christians Celebrate Birthdays? Did biblical era Jews celebrate birthdays? Who originally celebrated birthdays? When did many that profess Christ begin birthday celebrations? A related sermon video is available and is titled: Birthdays, Christians, and December 25th. French language: Où est la vraie Église Chrétienne aujourd’hui?
Where is the True Christian Church Today? This free online pdf booklet answers that question and includes 18 proofs, clues, and signs to identify the true vs. false Christian church. Plus 7 proofs, clues, and signs to help identify Laodicean churches. A related sermon is also available: Where is the True Christian Church? Here is a link to the booklet in the Spanish language: ¿Dónde está la verdadera Iglesia cristiana de hoy? Here is a link in the German language: WO IST DIE WAHRE CHRISTLICHE KIRCHE HEUTE? Here is a link in the French language: Où est la vraie Église Chrétienne aujourd’hui? Here is a link to a short animation: Which Church would Jesus Choose?
Continuing History of the Church of God This pdf booklet is a historical overview of the true Church of God and some of its main opponents from Acts 2 to the 21st century. Related sermon links include Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D. and Continuing History of the Church of God: 4th-16th Centuries and Continuing History of the Church of God: 17th-20th Centuries. The booklet is available in Spanish: Continuación de la Historia de la Iglesia de Dios, German: Kontinuierliche Geschichte der Kirche Gottes, French: L Histoire Continue de l Église de Dieu and Ekegusii Omogano Bw’ekanisa Ya Nyasae Egendererete.
The Gospel of the Kingdom of God This free online pdf booklet has answers many questions people have about the Gospel of the Kingdom of God and explains why it is the solution to the issues the world is facing. Here are links to three related sermons: The World’s False Gospel, The Gospel of the Kingdom: From the New and Old Testaments, and The Kingdom of God is the Solution.
Tradition and Scripture: From the Bible and Church Writings Are traditions on equal par with scripture? Many believe that is what Peter, John, and Paul taught. But did they? A related sermon is titled Tradition and Scripture.
The History of Early Christianity Are you aware that what most people believe is not what truly happened to the true Christian church? Do you know where the early church was based? Do you know what were the doctrines of the early church? Is your faith really based upon the truth or compromise?

COGwriter

A while back, a newsletter associated with Church of God Outreach Ministries had the following:

It’s not in the Book!

You turn up for an event—only to find it has been cancelled. You plan a picnic—and it pours. You look forward to a big night out—and go down with ‘flu. We are used to such disappointments—that’s life!

Then you get curious about some of your beliefs only to find they don’t fit the facts. The moon isn’t green cheese. The earth isn’t flat. Matter isn’t solid and can be in two places at once. And—you can’t find your long-held Christian beliefs in Christianity’s source Book—the Bible. Now that could present some longterm issues.

Let’s look at some misunderstandings. …

Sunday Observance
Sorry—not in the Book. The Book teaches observance of the seventh day, Saturday. It took more than three centuries for the pagan Sunday observance to supersede the day kept by Jesus, the apostles and the early church, with just a minority continuing to observe the seventh day. Millions of Christians now observe it. worldwide.

Christmas/Easter
Puzzling that neither gets a mention. Except for a brief reference in the Old Testament where God strongly condemns them, and some veiled warning references by the apostle Peter. But with clear evidence that God appointed festivals were and should still be observed.

Immortal soul
Not there. That’s the lie Satan taught to Adam and Eve: ‘…you shall surely not die’. God only is immortal. Those in whom resides God’s immortal Spirit will put on immortality at the first resurrection at the return of Christ.

Heaven
No—the saved do not go there. They remain in God’s care (as inert spirits) until Jesus returns, when they reign with him firmly on Earth. In the end, the Father comes from heaven to reside on Earth.

Law
No—it’s not ‘done away’. Jesus makes clear in the Scriptures that God’s Law undergirds all Christian behaviour. When the Father draws us to Jesus we are to set aside our law-breaking (‘repentance’) and are baptized by immersion as a symbol of our becoming a ‘new creature’ in Christ.

It is to God’s Word, the Christian Bible, all of it, that we must look for the authentic teaching of Jesus. He warned that many would pervert his message and urged us to be constantly on our guard for false teachings—and teachers!

Let me also state that not only are many doctrines that people think are Christian that are not in the Bible, they were not observed by Jesus’ early followers either. Furthermore, many of those teachings, that many now accept, were condemned by early professors of Christ.

For scriptural and historical proof, check out the following documented articles and videos:

Sunday and Christianity Was Sunday observed by the apostolic and true post-apostolic Christians? Who clearly endorsed Sunday? What relevance is the first or the “eighth” day? A related sermon is also available: Sunday: First and Eighth Day?
What Does the Roman Catholic Church Teach About Christmas and the Holy Days? Do you know what the Catholic Church says were the original Christian holy days? Was Christmas among them? Is December 25th Jesus’ birthday or that of the sun god? Here is a link to a related sermon: What do Catholic and other scholars teach about Christmas?
Did Early Christians Celebrate Easter? If not, when did this happen? Where did Easter come from? What do scholars and the Bible reveal? Here is a link to a video titled Why Easter?
Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.
Should You Observe God’s Holy Days or Demonic Holidays? This is a free pdf booklet explaining what the Bible and history shows about God’s Holy Days and popular holidays. A related sermon is Which Spring Days should Christians observe?
Did Early Christians Believe that Humans Possessed Immortality? What does John 3:16, and other writings, tell us? Did a doctrine kept adopted from paganism? Here is a YouTube video titled Are humans immortal?
Did Early Christians Teach They Were Going to Heaven? What do the Bible and scholars teach? What about ‘near-death experiences’? Here are links to a related sermons: Heaven and Christianity and It’s not heaven.
The Ten Commandments: The Decalogue, Christianity, and the Beast This is a free draft/unedited pdf book explaining the what the Ten Commandments are, where they came from, how early professors of Christ viewed them, and how various ones, including the Beast of Revelation, will oppose them. A related sermon is titled: The Ten Commandments and the Beast of Revelation.
Which Laws were Superceded? Which Remain? What about the Ten Commandments? What about the 613 regulations (called 613 Mitzvot) in the Old Testament? Which were ‘done away’?
Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism The CCOG is NOT Protestant. This free online book explains how the real Church of God differs from mainstream/traditional Protestants. Several sermons related to the free book are also available: Protestant, Baptist, and CCOG History; The First Protestant, God’s Command, Grace, & Character; The New Testament, Martin Luther, and the Canon; Eucharist, Passover, and Easter; Views of Jews, Lost Tribes, Warfare, & Baptism; Scripture vs. Tradition, Sabbath vs. Sunday; Church Services, Sunday, Heaven, and God’s Plan; Seventh Day Baptists/Adventists/Messianics: Protestant or COG?; Millennial Kingdom of God and God’s Plan of Salvation; Crosses, Trees, Tithes, and Unclean Meats; The Godhead and the Trinity; Fleeing or Rapture?; and Ecumenism, Rome, and CCOG Differences.
Where is the True Christian Church Today? This free online pdf booklet answers that question and includes 18 proofs, clues, and signs to identify the true vs. false Christian church. Plus 7 proofs, clues, and signs to help identify Laodicean churches. A related sermon is also available: Where is the True Christian Church? Here is a link to the booklet in the Spanish language: ¿Dónde está la verdadera Iglesia cristiana de hoy? Here is a link in the German language: WO IST DIE WAHRE CHRISTLICHE KIRCHE HEUTE? Here is a link in the French language: Où est la vraie Église Chrétienne aujourd’hui?
Continuing History of the Church of God This pdf booklet is a historical overview of the true Church of God and some of its main opponents from Acts 2 to the 21st century. Related sermon links include Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D. and Continuing History of the Church of God: 4th-16th Centuries and Continuing History of the Church of God: 17th-20th Centuries. The booklet is available in Spanish: Continuación de la Historia de la Iglesia de Dios, German: Kontinuierliche Geschichte der Kirche Gottes, French: L Histoire Continue de l Église de Dieu and Ekegusii Omogano Bw’ekanisa Ya Nyasae Egendererete.

Meta AI illustration

COGwriter

Is Christmas biblical? Is it based on truth? Was it an original Christian holy day?

The Continuing Church of God is pleased to announce the following sermon from its ContinuingCOG channel:

1:11:10

Biblical Examination of Christmas

Should Christians celebrate Christmas? Did Jesus or the Apostles observe it or tell people to do so? Jesus said that true worshippers worshipped God in truth. What is the scriptural and historical truth about Christmas? What does the word Christmas (Cristes Maesse) mean? Could Jesus have been born on December 25th according to ‘The Catholic Encyclopedia’ in regards to the census in the 2nd chapter of Luke’s gospel account? Was December 25th the ‘birthday’ of the sun god Mithras? Was there an ancient celebration involving gift-giving in the Winter? Did Emperor Constantine get Jesus’ birthday celebrated on 25 December starting in 336? Do Roman Catholic sources admit that they compromised with paganism for its adoption? What about evergreen trees, wreaths, and candles? Does the Bible discourage adopting pagan religious practices? Are Christians supposed to be separate and avoid the unclean? Should Christians blend demonic, idolatrous practices in their worship? Is it actually wrong to lie to your children about Santa Claus? Was Nicholas of the 4th century, really a saint? What about the holy days of the Bible? Should Passover, the Days of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, Trumpets, Atonement, Tabernacles, and the Last Great Day be kept by Christians? If so, what do they represent? Are Christians to accept “many wonders” as proof of the validity of traditions associated with Christmas? Could Christmas observe be a type of lawlessness that Jesus condemned? Dr. Thiel addresses these matters and more in this sermon.