[Sarah2013]

There has been a bit of a debate regarding the celebration of Christmas and it's origin. I have read many post regarding this celebration and it's origin. So now, here is my question, if Christmas is a pagan celebration or the like as some claim, then does that make the worship of a proven false god(s) ok? Here is why that particular debate holds no water compared to wmscog's doctrine and claim:

1. Christmas is a pagan holiday 

2. Sunday is sun-god worship

3. Zahng Gil Jah is god – mother god. who is the bride of God, which makes her a second god aside from God himself. There are no real scripture supporting this idea or belief either except the one given as support by Wmscog Gal. 4:26, of which, by the way, is incorrect. 

4. Ahnsanghong is the Holy Spirit/God. He left behind earthly children and his tombstone makes reference to that. He came from unbelieving parents originally. So God almighty, of all he could have chosen to be born into, he chose that which he is against. His books and the teaching  of Wmscog have so many inconsistencies and descrepancies – the teaching of Wmscog and the teaching of Ahng are not in accordance. 

5. Zahng Gil Jah, by the way does not move about the country. When was the last time she came to United States to spread the gospel of her son or her husband. Is she the bride of her husband or son. 

6. Jesus only made mention of a father and not a mother. 

Confusion! Confusion! Confusion! How can Christmas or sunday worship be bigger than the above?

I say that to say in very simple and plain English, If you want to keep at Christmas being a pagan holiday then for crying out loud. Keep your hands clean from sin. All of the above raises eyebrows but tell me, which do you think is really a problem, Christmas? Sunday worship? You got to be kidding me. If this is what Wmscog wants to hold onto, then you sincerely do not understand the God of the universe. To mimic him falsely is a serious sin. 

[emil]

[emil]

Simon wrote:

 

The fact you said it is better to worship a false God than to worship a false God is patently false

Context, context, context. He alleged I am worshiping a false god based on the fact that I celebrate Christmas. That is his way of looking at it. I do not agree that I am worshiping a false god on the basis of FTOS' criteria. My contention is that it is far better for me to celebrate Christmas, no matter how he interprets it, than to worship a false god like he does.

Now if you say both are the same, you have to agree with FTOS that celebrating the birth of Jesus on 25th December is tantamount to worshiping a false god. Are you making that assertion?

[Simon]

Then you twist his words as much as wmscog twists the Bible

[emil]

Simon wrote:

Then you twist his words as much as wmscog twists the Bible

How? Can you elaborate? Have I twisted his words or has he twisted mine?

[emil]

Renita, we could continue the discussion about pagan worship and saturnalia in this thread if you like.

[Love'n Honey]

emil wrote:

Renita, we could continue the discussion about pagan worship and saturnalia in this thread if you like.

Ok! =)

I'll go grab my comment from the other thread.

[Love'n Honey]

IMO keeping pagan traditions/laws is pagan even if you replace the pagan god with Jesus. Now, is Christmas pagan? Well, the name has changed.. People go door to door singing clothed instead of singing naked.. People only decorate trees instead of bowing down to them.. Men have sex with men regardless.. A lot of the pagan-ness of Saturnalia has changed but does that still make it pagan?

I would argue yes because a lot of the Christian-ness of Christianity has changed and people still say it's Christian. But in reality, I don't think Christmas itself is a pagan tradition because all the worshipping is for Jesus minus the pagan traditions. No one is worshipping trees or sacrificing a human as the devil or anything like that anymore. My answer rolls with my belief that once you take the false gods out of the situation, it's no longer pagan worship.

[Love'n Honey]

This is what Hal wrote

IrenaeusFTW wrote:

Hal, I really wish I was at a regular computer right now, but ill say this. If you don't accept Christ as messiah, I don't think you're going to be able to actually contribute to this thread. Why bother commenting on what Christ intended at Passover if you reject Christ?

 Because, he was insane. You compare a man to an animal yet he died a criminal. Christianity in its most basic sense is a pagan religion based upon pagan ideas set forth by Saul The Traitor from Tsarus. The actually commandment on Pesach is based upon the Torah, not crazy words and changed holidays based upon Greek and Roman holidays for being drunk and horny. Christmas is a pagan holiday not the birth of Yeshua. The Greek "NT" is full of bs to make Yeshua a human deity. All one needs to read is George Howard's interruptation of The Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

emil wrote:

Needs mentioning that the Saturnalia celebration started on Dec 17 and ended on 23rd December if I remember correctly. So the alleged connection is non-existent. [/quote

Saturnalia was an 8 day drunk fest which ended on the modern 25th with the gift giving. The Norse and Germans added the traditions of the tree and "Saint Nichalus" or Santa Claus to the mix.

[emil]

Hal wrote:

 Because, he was insane. You compare a man to an animal yet he died a criminal. Christianity in its most basic sense is a pagan religion based upon pagan ideas set forth by Saul The Traitor from Tsarus. The actually commandment on Pesach is based upon the Torah, not crazy words and changed holidays based upon Greek and Roman holidays for being drunk and horny. Christmas is a pagan holiday not the birth of Yeshua. The Greek "NT" is full of bs to make Yeshua a human deity. All one needs to read is George Howard's interruptation of The Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

There is no clear evidence that the oldest Hebrew Gospel of Matthew predated the original Greek one. Most scholars other than George Howard believe the Greek one was the original. Secondly, as far as interpretation of the Hebrew Gospel of Mathew goes, one has to take it with a large grain of salt. Even George Howard himself accepts that the Shem-Tob edition, which he studied, has been heavily edited over the ages. For those who know what the Shem-Tob was primarily used for, it becomes clear that the Shem-Tob Hebrew Gospel of Matthew is a edition with an agenda. Its purpose was for Jews to use it for polemics against Christians after the 14th century.

[Simon]

Matthew was written very hebraicly but Matthew being Jewish and translating actual dialogue could explain a lot