What are the Lessons of the Holocaust?

From the One Jerusalem Blog newsletter

Israel and the Jewish people have just commemorated the victims of the Holocaust. Sadly, this year's commemoration coincided with Iran's anti-Semitic President addressing a United Nations conference to condemn the State of Israel.

It is clear from the world's reaction to this conference that different people have learned different lessons from the Holocaust. Israel's new Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, speaks for the majority of Jews and most civilized people when he says we must confront bestial hatred that drives people to kill innocent people. This mindset translates into taking seriously the threat to destroy Israel by Iran and its terrorist allies. Netanyahu has taken on the mantle of stopping the radical Islamic regime of Iran from carrying out its threat.

One would hope that the rest of the civilized world would follow Israel's lead. Unfortunately, that has not been the case. The West has been uneven in its response to the saber rattling of Iran and Iran's illegal pursuit of nuclear weapons. There have been half hearted moves to impose sanctions but it is clear that there is not a strong commitment to make sanctions work. German companies still operate full-scale businesses in Iran. And Russia continues to sell Iran military equipment that help Iran fulfill its plans for nuclear weapons.

Even the decision by the British government to attend the Israel hate fest called Durban II shows the failure of many in the West to deal effectively with the Iranian threat. Instead there is a growing consensus that Iran should be treated as a responsible citizen of the international community. After all, no one objected to the United Nations decision to provide Achdeminjad with a platform from which he could attack the civilized world. Yes, some Western countries walked out of Druban when the Iranian President started into his hate-filled rant. But why were they there to begin with? Only Canada showed moral clarity when it dismissed Durban II, even before Achdeminjad said he would attend. Remember, the United States tried to participate but in the end made the right decision to stay away.

Besides Canada and Israel have any other governments learned any valuable lessons from the Holocaust? The inability of the international community to stop the carnage in Darfur suggests the answer is NO. The international communities failure to stop or even criticize the oppression of the Iranian people by its dictatorial rulers suggests the answer is NO. Unfortunately, this list can be extended.

The few nations who understand that Iran must be confronted and forced to abandon its evil ways are the Winston Churchill's of our age. A Churchill's biographer titled the volume covering the years when Churchill was a rare voice in favor of challenging Hitler "The Wilderness Years". Churchill was in the wilderness because the world believed it could appease Hitler and avoid confronting him. They learned the hard way that appeasement only allows the enemies of humanity to get stronger.

While the nations of the world have not digested the lessons they should have from the Holcaust what about America's President?

Recently President Obama spoke at a Holocaust event and his words should be studied. The first to do so is a friend of One Jerusalem, Michael Ledeen. Ledeen urges everyone to read the speech and to contemplate its messages.

Ledeen excerpts significant sections of the speech and offers his commentary. Ledeen writes:

He then gave his version of "never again," and it's a very odd version indeed. First, he draws hope from the survivors of the Holocaust. Those who came to America had a higher birthrate than the Jews who were already living here, and those members of "a chosen people" who created Israel. These, he says, chose life and asserted it despite the horrors they had endured. And then he goes on:

We find cause for hope as well in Protestant and Catholic children attending school together in Northern Ireland; in Hutus and Tutsis living side-by-side, forgiving neighbors who have done the unforgivable; in a movement to save Darfur that has thousands of high school and college chapters in 25 countries and brought 70,000 people to the Washington Mall, people of every age and faith and background and race united in common cause with suffering brothers and sisters halfway around the world.

Those numbers can be our future, our fellow citizens of the world showing us how to make the journey from oppression to survival, from witness to resistance and ultimately to reconciliation. That is what we mean when we say "never again."

So "never again" means that we learn from others how to forgive and forget, and ultimately live happily with one another. But that is not what "never again" means, at least for the generation of the Holocaust and for most of those who followed. For them, "never again" means that we will destroy the next would-be Fuhrer. In his entire speech, Obama never once mentions that the United States led a coalition of free peoples against Germany, Italy and Japan, nor does he ever discuss the obligation of sacrifice to prevent a recurrence. Indeed, his examples suggest that he doesn't grasp the full dimensions of the struggle against evil. Northern Ireland is a totally inappropriate example (nothing remotely approaching a Holocaust took place there), the relations between Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda and Burundi are hardly characterized by forgiveness, even though the president of Burundi is striving mightily to achieve a peaceful modus vivendi, and as for Darfur, well, despite the tens of thousands who demonstrated on the Mall, nobody has done much of anything to stop the Khartoum regime from slaughtering the peoples of the south.

In the history of modern times, the United States has done more than anyone else, perhaps more than the rest of the world combined, to defeat evil, and we are still doing it. Yet Obama says that we must "learn from others" how to move on, forgive and forget, and live happily ever after. But these are just words, they are not policies, or even actions. And the meanings he gives to his words show that he has no real intention of doing anything to thwart evil, any more than he had any concrete actions to propose to punish North Korea.

Given a President with this mindset can we avoid another dark-age?

Evidences Of Jesus Christ's Resurrection

Chuck Missler
from the April 07, 2009 eNews issue
http://www.khouse.org (visit our website for a FREE subscription)

---

"I claim to be an historian. My approach to Classics is historical. And I tell you that the evidence for the life, the death, and the resurrection of Christ is better authenticated than most of the facts of ancient history ..."
E. M. Blaiklock - Professor of Classics, Auckland University

The Resurrection of Christ is the most powerful event in history. It has affected the last 2000 years of history and politics, from peasants to kings to nations. Christianity has spread across the entire world, into every country and into a vast number of ethnic groups and languages. Billions of people have experienced the life-giving, healing, forgiveness and freedom offered by God because Jesus Christ conquered death and rose again from the grave.

The apostle Paul wrote in 1 Cor 15:12-22 that without the resurrection of Christ, the Christian faith is useless. "And if Christ be not raised," Paul wrote to the Corinthians, "your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable."

There are many skeptics who disregard the resurrection of Jesus Christ of Nazareth as a fable. However, the evidence for Jesus' resurrection is extremely strong, even to the point of converting some who sought to disprove it:

The Empty Tomb: Though well-trained Roman soldiers guarded the tomb of Jesus Christ, it was empty 3 days after Jesus' death as Jesus had repeatedly foretold (Matt 12:40, Mark 8:31). The guards had fled (a death penalty offense). The massive stone had been rolled away, and the body was gone – and was never produced by the enemies of the Christians. The linen grave clothes in which the Jews bury their dead were still in the tomb, undisturbed. From the Jewish historian Josephus to a compilation of 5th-century Jewish writings called the "Toledoth Jeshu", even Jewish sources and traditions admit that the tomb was empty. The body was never found.

Living Witnesses: There were a multitude of witnesses who saw Jesus Christ alive after his death. The disciples, the travelers on the road to Emmaus and a number of women all spoke to Jesus alive. Thomas doubted until he was able to put his fingers into Jesus' wounds (John 20:26-27). He later spread the Gospel all the way to India. The apostle Paul tells of 500 people to whom Jesus appeared at one time, most of whom were still alive and available for questioning when Paul wrote his letter (1 Cor 15:6). When several people testify in a courtroom that they witnessed an event, and their accounts are found consistent with each other, their testimony is considered factual information. Jesus Christ was seen alive many times by hundreds of different people over the course of forty days after his death (John 20-21, Acts 1:3).

The Disciples: Christ's followers, who had been fearful and who had run away when Jesus was arrested, were completely changed after the Resurrection and became courageous witnesses. Peter, who had denied knowing Christ when recognized by a simple servant girl, became the powerfully bold leader of those who had seen Christ alive, speaking to the thousands gathered in Jerusalem for the Feast of Shavuot – Pentecost. A person may die for a lie if they do not know it is a lie. But people do not give their lives up and face severe persecution to spread a lie they themselves invented. The fact that the disciples willingly suffered beatings and persecution and death is strong evidence that they had actually witnessed the resurrection they refused to stop telling people about.

Saul of Tarsus: A devoutly religious Pharisee, who persecuted the Church and had Christ's followers thrown in prison, Paul had his life absolutely changed by his encounter with Christ. He became a devoted follower of Christ himself, spreading the Gospel throughout Turkey and Greece in the face of beatings and shipwrecks and imprisonment and, finally, execution.

"If the New Testament were a collection of secular writings, their authenticity would generally be regarded as beyond all doubt." - F. F. Bruce, Manchester University

Skeptics' Arguments Against the Resurrection:

The Hallucination Theory claims that the witnesses who met the resurrected Jesus were all "seeing things" - they were hallucinating. However, this goes against common sense as well as psychological principles. Five hundred people do not all hallucinate the same thing. Jesus appeared to many people at many different times. Also, the body was never produced.

The Swoon Theory argues that Jesus did not die – that he simply fainted from loss of blood and exhaustion. However, this also goes against common sense. The Romans were professionals who severely whipped Jesus, hung him on a cross, and then stabbed him in the side with a spear to make sure he was dead. He was in the grave for three days, wrapped head to foot in a burial cloth, without food or water or medical treatment. When he appeared to his disciples he was completely whole and healthy and his appearance inspired awe and worship that lasted throughout the rest of the disciples' lives.

The Disciples Faked the Resurrection: Discouraged, fearful fishermen and former tax collectors, whose teacher had been viciously murdered, were in little position to take on a detachment of trained Roman soldiers guarding the tomb. They would have had to create a fantastic plan in order to fight off or bribe the professional soldiers, raid the tomb, unbind the grave clothes from Christ's body, take the body away, and hide it where nobody would ever find it. The Roman soldiers faced death if they failed in their guard duty, and the disciples had little money for bribing anybody. Many people would have had to be involved in the conspiracy, and all those involved would not only have known the truth, but would know that they were risking meeting the same fate as their recently crucified leader. And what purpose could it possibly serve, if Jesus were dead? They would have had nothing to gain. Their leader was gone and they would have only faced persecution and death for their invented resurrection story.

And again, the disciples' attitudes completely changed after the Resurrection and especially after Pentecost. They became bold and courageous in spreading their message, fearless of beatings or imprisonment. They never sought to fight Rome or to establish any position or kingdom or authority for themselves. They had nothing to gain, physically speaking. They simply went about the known world, telling their story in spite of persecution and suffering, poverty and ridicule. Their message quickly spread across the Middle East and Europe and even into Asia without any military conquest or political support involved - and in spite of strong opposition. Only belief and hope based in the reality of their experiences would have produced such dedication in the lives of Christ's followers.

Perhaps the greatest evidence today of Christ's resurrection is the work that he is still doing in the lives of every day people. In the name of Jesus, people are still being healed emotionally and physically and spiritually by the same power that raised Jesus Christ from the dead. Sinners are being freed from the burden and pain and shame of sin – sometimes immediately, sometimes after long years of steady work by the Holy Spirit in their lives. Hearts are being mended and lives are being turned around. The best evidence today is the faithful follower of Christ who can say, "He saved me, and I am not the person I used to be" just as the apostles testified 2000 years ago.

[For more in-depth coverage of the above arguments, as well as many further evidences and related information, please see the links below.]

Related Links:

• Evidence for the Resurrection - Leadership U
• Contemporary Scholarship and the Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ - Leadership U
• The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? - F.F. Bruce
• Evidence and Answers On Many Issues Related to Christianity - CARM - Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
• His Unfamiliar Face - Koinonia House
• The Jesus Tomb - Koinonia House
• Reflections of His Image: Pride vs. Humility - Koinonia House

Who Were the Magi?

Chuck Missler

[Português]

Each year, as we approach the holiday season, our preparations for Christmas include revisiting the events surrounding the birth of Our Lord. Bethlehem,1 the shepherds, and the angels are familiar to us all. But not much is generally known about the mysterious "Magi" who came to worship the infant Jesus. The following background may be helpful to stimulate conversations around the fireplace as our thoughts turn to this incredible event from which we measure our very calendar.

Traditions

Most of what we associate with the "Magi" is from early church traditions. Most have assumed there were three of them, since they brought three specific gifts (but the Biblical text doesn't number them). They are called "Magi" from the Latinized form of the Greek word magoi, transliterated from the Persian, for a select sect of priests. (Our word "magic" comes from the same root.)

As the years passed, the traditions became increasingly embellished. By the 3rd century they were viewed as kings. By the 6th century they had names: Bithisarea, Melichior, and Gathaspa. Some even associated them with Shem, Ham and Japheth-the three sons of Noah-and thus with Asia, Africa, and Europe. A 14th century Armenian tradition identifies them as Balthasar, King of Arabia; Melchior, King of Persia; and Gasper, King of India.
(Relics attributed to them emerged in the 4th century and were transferred from Constantinople to Milan in the 5th century, and then to Cologne in 1162 where they remain enshrined.) These are interesting traditions, but what do we really know about them?

The Priesthood of the Medes

The ancient Magi were a hereditary priesthood of the Medes (known today as the Kurds) credited with profound and extraordinary religious knowledge. After some Magi, who had been attached to the Median court, proved to be expert in the interpretation of dreams, Darius the Great established them over the state religion of Persia.2 (Contrary to popular belief, the Magi were not originally followers of Zoroaster.3 That all came later.)

It was in this dual capacity, whereby civil and political counsel was invested with religious authority, that the Magi became the supreme priestly caste of the Persian empire and continued to be prominent during the subsequent Seleucid, Parthian, and Sasanian periods. 4

The Role of Daniel

One of the titles given to Daniel was Rab-mag, the Chief of the Magi.5 His unusual career included being a principal administrator in two world empires-the Babylonian and the subsequent Persian Empire. When Darius appointed him, a Jew, over the previously hereditary Median priesthood, the resulting repercussions led to the plots involving the ordeal of the lion's den.6

Daniel apparently entrusted a Messianic vision (to be announced in due time by a "star") to a secret sect of the Magi for its eventual fulfillment. But first let's review some historical background.

Political Background

Since the days of Daniel, the fortunes of both the Persian and the Jewish nation had been closely intertwined. Both nations had, in their turn, fallen under Seleucid domination in the wake of Alexander's conquests. Subsequently, both had regained their independence: the Jews under Maccabean leadership, and the Persians as the dominating ruling group within the Parthian Empire.

It was at this time that the Magi, in their dual priestly and governmental office, composed the upper house of the Council of the Megistanes (from which we get the term "magistrates"), whose duties included the absolute choice and election of the king of the realm.

It was, therefore, a group of Persian-Parthian "king makers" who entered Jerusalem in the latter days of the reign of Herod. Herod's reaction was understandably one of fear when one considers the background of Roman-Parthian rivalry that prevailed during his lifetime.

Rome on the Rise

Pompey, the first Roman conqueror of Jerusalem in 63 B.C., had attacked the Armenian outpost of Parthia. In 55 B.C. Crassus led Roman legions in sacking Jerusalem and in a subsequent attack on Parthia proper. The Romans were decisively defeated at the battle of Carrhae with the loss of 30,000 troops, including their commander. The Parthians counterattacked with a token invasion of Armenia, Syria, and Palestine.

Nominal Roman rule was reestablished under Antipater, the father of Herod, who, in his turn, retreated before another Parthian invasion in 40 B.C.

Mark Antony reestablished Roman sovereignty in 37 B.C. and, like Crassus before him, also embarked on a similarly ill-fated Parthian expedition. His disastrous retreat was followed by another wave of invading Parthians, which swept all Roman opposition completely out of Palestine (including Herod himself, who fled to Alexandria and then to Rome). With Parthian collaboration, Jewish sovereignty was restored, and Jerusalem was fortified with a Jewish garrison.

Herod, by this time, had secured from Augustus Caesar the title of "King of the Jews." However, it was not for three years, including a five months' siege by Roman troops, that Herod was able to occupy his own capital city! Herod had thus gained the throne of a rebellious buffer state which was situated between two mighty contending empires. At any time his own subjects might conspire in bringing the Parthians to their aid. At the time of the birth of Christ, Herod may have been close to his final illness. Augustus was also aged, and Rome, since the retirement of Tiberius, was without an experienced military commander. Pro-Parthian Armenia was fomenting revolt against Rome (which was successfully accomplished within two years.)

The Tensions in Parthia

The time was ripe for another Parthian invasion of the buffer provinces, except for the fact that Parthia itself was racked by internal dissension. Phraates IV, the unpopular and aging king, had once been deposed and it was not improbable that the Persian Magi were already involved in the political maneuvering requisite to choosing his successor. It was conceivable that the Magi might be taking advantage of the king's lack of popularity to further their own interests with the establishment of a new dynasty, which could have been implemented if a sufficiently strong contender could be found.

At this time it was entirely conceivable that the Messianic prophecies of the Old Testament, culminating in the writings of Daniel, one of their own Magians, was of profound motivating significance. The promise of a divinely imposed world dominion at the hands of a Jewish monarch might be more than acceptable to them. (Their own Persian and Medo-Persian history was studded with Jewish nobles, ministers, and counselors; and in the great Achaemenid days, some of the kings themselves were of Jewish blood.)

The Entourage to Jerusalem

In Jerusalem, the sudden appearance of the Magi, probably traveling in force with all imaginable oriental pomp and accompanied by an adequate cavalry escort to insure their safe penetration of Roman territory, certainly alarmed Herod and the populace of Jerusalem.

It would seem as if these Magi were attempting to perpetrate a border incident which could bring swift reprisal from Parthian armies. Their request of Herod regarding the one who "has been born King of the Jews"7 was a calculated insult to him, a non-Jew 8 who had contrived and bribed his way into that office.

Consulting his scribes, Herod discovered from the prophecies in the Tanach (the Old Testament) that the Promised One, the Messiah, would be born in Bethle-hem.9 Hiding his concern and expressing sincere interest, Herod requested them to keep him informed.
After finding the babe and presenting their prophetic gifts, the Magi "being warned in a dream" (a form of communication most acceptable to them) departed to their own country, ignoring Herod's request. (Within two years Phraataces, the parricide son of Phraates IV, was duly installed by the Magi as the new ruler of Parthia.)

Daniel's Messianic Role

Living six centuries before the birth of Christ, Daniel certainly received an incredible number of Messianic prophecies. In addition to several overviews of all of Gentile world history,10 the Angel Gabriel told him the precise day that Jesus would present Himself as King to Jerusalem.11

It is interesting that Daniel's founding of a secret sect of the Magi also had a role in having these prominent Gentiles present gifts at the birth of the Jewish Messiah.

The Christmas Gifts

The gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh were also prophetic, speaking of our Lord's offices of king, priest, and savior. Gold speaks of His kingship; frankincense was a spice used in the priestly duties; and myrrh was an embalming ointment anticipating His death.

In the Millennium, He will also receive the gifts of gold and frankincense;12 but no myrrh: His death was once and for all.

What gifts are YOU going to give Him this year? Discuss it with Him.

* * *

For a review of other background items, see The Christmas Story: What Really Happened. Also, for a complete study of one of the most captivating and astonishing books of the Bible, see our Expositional Commentary on the Book of Daniel.

This article was originally published in the
November 1999 Personal Update NewsJournal.
For a FREE 1-Year Subscription, click here.
________________________________________
**NOTES**
________________________________________

1. For background on Bethlehem, study the Book of Ruth, our briefing package, The Romance of Redemption, or Chuck's Expositional Commentary on Ruth and Esther.
2. Oneiromancy, not astrology, is their key skill mentioned by Herodotus, I.107, 120; VII.19.
3. Encyclopedia Britannica, 7:691.
4. Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, 4:31-34.
5. Daniel 4:9; 5:11.
6. Daniel Chapter 6.
7. Matthew 2:2.
8. Herod was Idumean (an Edomite), a traditional enemy of Israel.
9. Micah 5:2. (Revealed by Holy Scripture, not astrology.)
10. Daniel 2 and 7. See also, An Empire Reborn?.
11. Daniel 9:24-26. See also, Daniel's 70 Weeks.
12. Isaiah 60:6.

Part 4 of 'The Da Vinci Deception': Eagles and Bees?

Chuck Missler

[Português]

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears. And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
2 Timothy 4:3,4

In our series of articles reviewing some of the background behind Dan Brown's book, The Da Vinci Code, we have explored his deceitful presentation of the so-called "Facts" precedent to the novel itself, the blasphemous heresies regarding Mary Magdalene and the related Merovingian legends, as well as the false representations from the spurious "Gnostic Gospels."
What makes all this disinformation even more disturbing is that there are powerful leaders behind the emergence of the "New Europe" who take these myths seriously.

In this final article, we will explore some of the "codes" that Dan Brown hasn't resorted to (at least not yet!).

One of the curious facets of the Merovingian legends was their apparent obsession with the Tribe of Dan. While this aspect didn't emerge in Dan Brown's novel, it has a high likelihood of coming up in some of the related fanciful speculations that will emerge in the days ahead.

The Tribe of Dan

Although we do not take the myths of the "Ten Lost Tribes" of Israel seriously,1 it is interesting to examine the strange maneuvers of the Tribe of Dan. Their disappointing performance seems to have been anticipated, enigmatically, by Jacob on his deathbed as he prophesied over each of his sons:

Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse heels, so that his rider shall fall backward.
Genesis 49:17

This identification with a serpent was changed by Ahiezer, the leader of the Tribe of Dan during the Exodus, to an eagle with a serpent in its mouth as their tribal ensign.2
When the conquest of Canaan was completed and the tribes received their land allocations, the Tribe of Dan was given the land west of Benjamin, placing them between Jerusalem and the Philistines. (Even though Dan was one of the largest tribes, it received one of the smallest - and most troublesome - allocations.)
The primary hero of this tribe is, of course, Samson. Although the subject of several colorful episodes, he actually accomplishes little of practical value. His riddle involving bees resulted in an additional identity idiom for his tribe.3

After Samson's death, the tribe was unable to adequately deal with their Philistine adversaries 4 and sought an alternative location, which was ultimately found in the North.5

It is interesting that in the "Song of Deborah," commemorating the victory over Sisera, Dan is chided for his distancing himself from the perils of the emerging nation:

Gilead abode beyond Jordan: and why did Dan remain in ships? Asher continued on the sea shore, and abode in his breaches.
Judges 5:17

Dan's descendants apparently became skilled sailors and migrated north and westward to seek their own futures. It is remarkable that Moses had previously anticipated this in his prophetic summary:

And of Dan he said, Dan is a lion's whelp: he shall leap from Bashan.
Deuteronomy 33:22

How could he "leap from Bashan" (the Golan Heights) if he had been officially allocated the area west of Jerusalem? This prophecy by Moses anticipated his relocating to the North!

Editorial Derision?

The Tribe of Dan was the first to fall into idolatry.6 Dan's disconnection from the commonwealth seems to be anticipated by the Holy Spirit in His dealing with the tribe throughout Scripture: the names of his sons are omitted in genealogies;7 Dan is either mentioned last,8 or his name is blotted out altogether!9

His omission from the list of tribes in Revelation 7 is a well-known mystery. Irenaeus explains this omission by suggesting that the Antichrist is to come from the tribe of Dan - a belief which he bases on Jeremiah 8:16 from the Septuagint version ("from Dan shall we hear the noise of his swift horses").10

The Bee Identity

When the tomb of one of the earliest Merovingian kings was unearthed, a treasure including 300 tiny gold bees was discovered. These bees are regarded as a symbol of the Tribe of Dan, linked with Samson's riddle.11

When Napoleon was crowned, he insisted that his coronation cloak included the 300 bees embroidered into it, apparently evidencing his desiring an identity with the Merovingians and the Tribe of Dan. When he married Marie Louise Habsburg, he insisted that these same bees be embroidered into her wedding gown.

The Merovingian legends - and the Magdalene heresy - are taken seriously by many of the royal families in Europe and among some of the powerful activists behind the European Union today.

(It is also interesting that the Mormon Church accepts the Magdalene heresy and that the state symbol of Utah is the bee.)

The Eagle Identity

It is also worth noting that the ensign of Israel's enemies always seems to be that of an eagle: Herod, the Romans, the Germans, the Czars, et al. (It is interesting that even Sparta and Troy may have links with the Tribe of Dan!12)

It disturbs some to note that the symbol of the United States is also, of course, the eagle. The apparent Masonic symbolism on the Great Seal of the United States also disturbs many (look at your dollar bill and consult these images: 1,2,3,4):

The 32 feathers of the right wing are said to represent the 32 degrees of the Freemasonry. The 33 feathers on the left wing include the honorary 33rd degree of the Scottish Rite. The nine tail feathers are said to highlight the Council of Nine when the Illuminati merged with the Freemasons on May 1, 1776.

The ostensible occultic significance seems even more pronounced on the reverse side: the All Seeing Eye (the "Open Eye" of Egypt and the "Mind's Eye" of the Gnostics) and the Latin phrases "Annuit Coeptis" (announcing the birth of) "Novus Ordo Seclorum" (New World Order).
The occult agenda behind world politics should surprise no serious student of Daniel Chapter 10. Satan seems to love symbols.

More Surprises Coming?

Did you know that there appears to be a 151 ft. statue of Mary Magdalene, dressed in a Roman toga, holding the "Holy Grail" as a torch, in one of the most prominent international harbors today? Designed by Auguste Bartholdi, it was privately funded by the French Freemasons and presently adorns New York Harbor.

Are there other occultic surprises around the corner? Will the rise of paganism and apostasy in America bring about a final evil twist as we plunge into the End Times? Will America ultimately join the world in challenging the Abrahamic Covenant by also turning against Israel?
We must not take our Christian heritage for granted. It came at a very high price, paid by those who invested in their posterity. We must take our responsibilities seriously, or we will be disenfranchising our children and grandchildren. (See David Barton's article here.)

* * *

See here for details on our latest briefing, The Da Vinci Deception, available now on video, DVD, audio tape cassette, audio CD and MP3 download.

This article was originally published in the
October 2004 Personal Update NewsJournal.
For a FREE 1-Year Subscription, click here.
________________________________________
**NOTES**
________________________________________

1. This unbiblical myth arises from confusing the original geographical allocations with the subsequent individual commingling resulting from the disruptions from the separation of the Northern and Southern Kingdoms after Solomon's death. Those who wanted to remain faithful to the Temple worship migrated to the South. Those who favored idol worship migrated to the North (2 Chronicles 11:13-17). For a complete discussion of the myth of the "Ten Lost Tribes," see our Expositional Commentary on the Twelve Tribes, appended to our Commentary on Joshua. This is also summarized in our Expositional Commentary on James.
2. Numbers 1:12 2:25 10:25;1 Chronicles 12:3. Merrill F. Unger, Unger's Bible Dictionary, Moody Press, Chicago, 1966, pp.235-236.
3. Judges 14:14.
4. Judges 16 - 21.
5. Judges 19:47.
6. Judges 18:30; Golden Calves: 1 Kings 12:28,29; 2 Kings 10:29.
7. Genesis 46:23; Numbers 26:42; Hushim?, Shuham? = "pit digger."
8. Numbers 10:25; Joshua 19:47-49; 1 Chronicles 27:16-22.
9. 1 Chronicles 1-10; Revelation 7.
10. Adv. Haer. 5. 30. 2
11. Judges 14:14.
12. 1 Maccabees 12:5-23; 14:20-23; Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews Bk 12:4; 13:5.

Part 3 of 'The Da Vinci Deception': Another Gospel

Chuck Missler

[Português]

As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
Galatians 1:9

As we've said in our previous two issues, the popular but shamefully blasphemous novel by Dan Brown, The Da Vinci Code, has raised many troubling questions, particularly among the less informed, and with a major motion picture in the works, this subject will be a popular topic of conversation for months to come.

In his novel, Dan Brown attempts to support his outrageous notions by using allusions from the Gnostic Gospels and twisted distortions of the early church councils, all of which raise serious questions: What makes us so confident that our Bible is what it purports to be? How do we know? What about these "missing" books of the Bible?

Brown's distortion of history is rampant throughout his novel. He assumes that Constantine made Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire-rather, he simply granted freedom of worship in his Edict of Milan in A.D. 313. It was a subsequent successor, Theodosius (379-395), who made Christianity the state religion in 381. Brown's Constantine "upgraded a mortal Christ to deity," and "secured male dominance and suppression of women"... "converting the world from matriarchal paganism to patriarchal Christianity." He insists that Constantine canonized selected favorable Gospels from "more than 80 available." His deliberate distortions are, of course, contradicted by clear historical records.

Council of Nicaea

The Council of Nicaea was convened in A.D. 325 with 318 bishops to settle disputes about Christology, not to dispute or modify the "canon." ("Canon," meaning standard, refers to those Scriptures that were accepted by the early churches as God-breathed, or inspired.) The principal precipitating issue was between Arius and Athanasius. Arius argued that Jesus was simply a created being. He was a great communicator and was causing deep disputes throughout the Empire. Athanasius argued for the full deity of Christ and was clearly vindicated by the proceedings of the Council (as exemplified by the famous Nicene Creed).

Brown's Version

"It was at the Council of Nicaea in 325 that Church leaders decided by vote to make Jesus divine...Until that moment in history, Jesus was viewed by His followers as a mortal prophet."
And, according to Brown, it was a "close vote"! According to him, the presently accepted Gospels were selected from "more than 80" available. All of this is deliberate misrepresentation to support his attack on Jesus Christ and His church.

Twenty rulings were issued at the Council of Nicaea and the contents of all of them are still in existence: not one of them involved issues regarding the canon.

As for the vote that was finally taken, only 5 out of 318 dissented; only two of those refused to sign the resulting resolutions, which reaffirmed the deity of Christ, not issues regarding the canonical Gospels.

If Christ was not fully God, then God was not the Redeemer of mankind.
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
Colossians 1:16 (Also, see Jn 1:1; Rom 9:5; Heb 1:1-8; etc.)
During the 1st century-two centuries before the Council of Nicaea - even before the end of His earthly ministry, Christ's divinity was already being acknowledged, as evidenced by Thomas: "My Lord and my God!"1

During the 2nd century - still a hundred years before the Council of Nicaea - we have ample quotes from the early church fathers:

Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch (A.D. 110): "There is One God who manifests himself through Jesus Christ his son"; "Son of Mary and Son of God…Jesus Christ our Lord…God Incarnate…Christ God," etc.

Polycarp of Bishop of Smyrna (A.D. 112-118), in his letter to the church at Philippi, assumes the divinity of Jesus, His glorification, etc.

Justin Martyr (~A.D. 150): "being the first-begotten Word of God, is even God"2; "...both God and Lord of hosts."3

Irenaeus (~A.D. 185): "our Lord, and God, and Saviour, and King."4

Clement of Alexandria (~A.D. 200): "truly most manifest Deity, He that is made equal to the Lord of the universe; because he was His Son."5

Another of the often-overlooked rebuttals to those who deny Christ's claim to deity were the persecutions in Rome, and the voluntary martyrdom of the early Christians for their refusal to worship the emperor. Their martyrdom was a result of their exclusive commitment to Christ as God.

How We Got the New Testament

The New Testament was canonized in the 1st century while the apostles were alive and all facts could be checked out (Lk 1:2; Acts 1:21,22; 1 Jn 2:3). It was endorsed by Christ in advance (Jn 14:25-26) and was considered a "more sure word of prophecy" (2 Pet 1:16-19).

The Process

Letters were received and then circulated by the early church, and a growing group of them became recognized as authoritative (Apostolic) and in harmony with accepted doctrine. All 27 books were accepted by the end of the 1st century and every New Testament book was cited as authoritative by a church father within one generation.

The Gnostic Gospels

The term "gnostic" refers to gnosis, or knowledge. However, here it refers to the concept of hidden, secret, or special knowledge. The Gnostics were a growing problem in the early church and many of the New Testament epistles, as well as the numerous quotes from the early church fathers, were in rebuttal to the several heresies promoted by the Gnostics.

(In fact, Paul's second letter to the Thessalonians was a response to a forgery being circulated as if from him.6)

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
2 Timothy 4:3

A large number of spurious documents emerged during the centuries following the ministries of the Apostles and were universally rejected by the early church. Copies of a group of these were found at Nag Hammadi (in Egypt) dating from the 3rd and 4th centuries, and these are uncritically accepted by Brown as accurate. These include The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Philip, The Gospel of Mary, The Gospel of Truth, and about four dozen others
They are not "Gospels" at all, but rather speculative opinions, totally devoid of any verifiable facts. Furthermore, they were written under false pseudonyms in an attempt to gain legitimacy. The early church rejected any documents under pseudonyms as being inconsistent with the concept of God-breathed inspiration.7

Lastly, they were all written centuries after the Gospel period - in contrast to the contemporaneous eyewitness accounts in the New Testament - and make no pretense of being actual records of events - in fact, they are anti-historical rather than simply non -historical!
In particular, Brown leans on The Gospel of Philip and its out-of-context fragmentary reference to a kiss - in which Jesus ostensibly kissed his other students as well - but this still suggests nothing about marriage or any sexual innuendo. Brown leans on a word in the "Aramaic" (although The Gospel of Philip came to us in Coptic!) that he maintains means "spouse." The word actually happens to be a loan word from the Greek: koinonia , which can mean companion, as in fellowship, etc.

The Gospel of Philip makes no reference that supports any of Brown's contentions. But even if it did, it would be irrelevant since it was written more than two centuries after the Gospel period, under a pseudonym posing as someone he wasn't. No serious scholar can take it seriously as having any historical merit.

(Many would seem to accept Napoleon's cynical perspective: "What is history, but a fable agreed upon?")
The popular novel is, indeed, malicious, deliberate fiction - posing subtly as factual - and is clearly, itself, a fulfillment of prophecy:

Even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you:
2 Peter 2:1-3

But it can also be a blessing by causing serious Christians to "do their homework" and find out just how the Bible came into being and the process by which the New Testament achieved codification during their early years.8

For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
1 Corinthians 11:19

Codes Brown Didn't Include

We will continue this series with a review of some surprising aspects involving the Tribe of Dan, the associated Merovingian Myths, and some of the contemporary implications of the Magdalene Heresy and their possible role in the unification of the New Europe today. We will also highlight some bizarre speculations regarding a 150 ft. statue of "Mary Magdalene," wearing a toga and holding the "Holy Graal," that graces an international port to this day. Stay tuned.

This article was originally published in the
September 2004 Personal Update NewsJournal.
For a FREE 1-Year Subscription, click here.
________________________________________
**NOTES**
________________________________________

1. John 20:28. See also John 1:1; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:8-10; 1 Peter 1:1, et al.
2. First Apology , ch. 63.
3. Dialogue with Trypho , ch 36.
4. Against Heresies , bk1, ch 10.
5. Exhortation to the Heathen, ch 10, Vol 2. All of these references can be found in Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, The Ante-Nicene Fathers : Translations of the Writings of the Fathers Down to A.D. 325, 10 Vols.
6. 2 Thessalonians 2:2.
7. The Epistle to the Hebrews is the notable exception. It appears to be the 3rd of a trilogy on Habakkuk 2:4, along with Romans and Galatians.
8. These topics are covered in our Learn the Bible in 24 Hours publication , and also in our briefing package, How We Got Our Bible.