tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post5792360004980085537..comments2024-03-28T09:59:14.226-04:00Comments on AS BEREANS DID: Nimrod's Birthday Was January 6?Marthahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12438486498450616814noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-3001947288240268732023-12-13T18:45:39.991-05:002023-12-13T18:45:39.991-05:00I read this article a few more times over the past...I read this article a few more times over the past couple days and realized a few new things that never occurred to me before. So, I revamped it. I also edited it for readability. I like it a lot better now.xHWAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01061716053302210598noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-23368858104189184802020-01-05T14:00:59.982-05:002020-01-05T14:00:59.982-05:00Hello Larry. We don't think Christmas, Easter,...Hello Larry. We don't think Christmas, Easter, etc are pagan because we have looked up where their origin comes from. We didn't take anyone's word for it. We didn't just go to Wicca website and take what they said for truth. We went to the oldest, most reliable sources we could find, and we went to the newest most reliable experts the world has to offer, and in every instance we found that Christmas, Easter, etc are not pagan at all in their origins.<br /><br />You mention the Easter Bunny. That has nothing to do with the origins of Easter, and can be safely left out without any effect on the day whatsoever. The Easter Bunny appears quite recently as the first known mention comes from Georg Franck von Frankenau in his writing “De Ovis Paschalibus” [“On Easter Eggs”] in 1682. 1682 is about 1682 years too late to have anything to do with the origins of Easter. Easter is the most well documented of all the holidays.<br /><br />If you want to ask if it's OK to tell a lie, then let us all apply the same standard to your comments here. You are telling a lie about the pagan origins of Easter. Does God say it anywhere in the Bible it's ok to tell a white lie? Then you must stop telling this lie. A lie it is, no matter how strongly you are attached to it.<br /><br />To help you better understand the origin of Easter, we have compiled these articles:<br /><a href="http://asbereansdid.blogspot.com/2013/04/easter-faq.html" rel="nofollow">Easter FAQ</a><br /><a href="http://asbereansdid.blogspot.com/2012/11/history-of-easter-part-i.html" rel="nofollow">Easter History Part I</a><br /><a href="http://asbereansdid.blogspot.com/2010/04/easter-history-part-ii.html" rel="nofollow">Easter History Part II</a><br /><a href="http://asbereansdid.blogspot.com/2018/03/the-history-channel-flubs-easter.html" rel="nofollow">The History Channel Flubs Easter</a><br /><br />We have many more, of course, so please check them all out. God bless you in your pursuit of truth, and peace to you.<br />xHWAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01061716053302210598noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-79497211511044348892019-12-28T04:26:14.245-05:002019-12-28T04:26:14.245-05:00If anyone believes that Christmas, Easter, etc. Ar...If anyone believes that Christmas, Easter, etc. Are not pagan look up where there orgin comes from. Question. Do Rabbits lay eggs. Is there a deer that fly threw air. These things are all based on a lie for little children to believe and once they even understand it they grow up believing that is ok too tell a lie. Then by doing this you only get closer thinking well its ok to tell a little white lie. Does God say it anywhere in the Bible it's ok to tell a white lie. What does this tell are children can you blame them for telling you a lie sine you teach them several every year. And all these things have a Pagan orgin. Think about it. Larryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00342124763936522633noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-2859205725421475452019-10-19T08:03:39.585-04:002019-10-19T08:03:39.585-04:00Except that's not at all what they did, and we...Except that's not at all what they did, and we demonstrated that. <br /><br />The events they speak about are not in the Babylonian or Egyptian calendars to begin with. They weren't applying old calendars forward to the Gregorian; they were applying Julian backwards to the old calendars. The Babylonian and Egyptian calendars do not suffer from the mathematical error of the Julian calendar, plus they predate it by hundreds if not thousands of years, so what they were doing is literally impossible.<br /><br />They took what they wasn't in the Babylonian and Egyptian calendars, applied the error of a future calendar to them, and called it truth.xHWAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01061716053302210598noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-68196068666971622162019-10-14T03:19:35.926-04:002019-10-14T03:19:35.926-04:00UHM My guess is they took what they know of what b...UHM My guess is they took what they know of what both the Egyptians and Babylonians used as a calendar and their days and then translated those days into the Gregorian calendar. It's not rocket science to know that. Same as using the dates given in the old Testament and cross referencing that with our modern calendar. Duh!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-26570940385664412592014-01-15T20:42:53.582-05:002014-01-15T20:42:53.582-05:00Now I have no doubt that the Armweakists will try ...Now I have no doubt that the Armweakists will try to explain your article away by saying,"different cultures celebrated Nimrod's birth on different days." The solstice lasts on one day only so how can the Armweakists say that Nimrod's birth is the solstice and then claim that Nimrod's birth was celebrated on January 6th? Isn't that anachronistic?! January 6th was never, at any point in time, the solstice. In the end they will whine something like this,"Okay, I give up. Nimrod's birthday always lasted for a week and 5 days." Once again we see the Armweakist tactic, that is, moving the goalposts.InHocSignoVincesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-53705096531270855412013-12-19T09:19:02.942-05:002013-12-19T09:19:02.942-05:00Hoeh was saying that the Babylonians celebrated th...Hoeh was saying that the Babylonians celebrated the solstice, which he later demonstrated that no one cared about. His goal was to "paganize" Christmas and Epiphany.<br /><br />You are absolutely correct, Dillon, that under a lunar calendar the solstice would move around each year and never become associated with any single calendar date regardless of what calendar we tie it to. (Not just the winter solstice, but any single event on a lunar calendar would be this way. Yule, Samhain, Eostremonath, etc.) UNLESS that calendar was purposefully adjusted to guarantee that the solstice (or whatever event have you) did fall on one particular calendar date every year. Problem is, there is absolutely no evidence that the Babylonians did this.<br />I'll go one more and say there is absolutely no evidence for the overwhelming majority of what Hoeh wrote in his article.<br /><br />There is evidence that the Egyptians adjusted their calendar to try and get their New Year to coincide with the rising of the star Sirius in the summer.<br />There is evidence that the Jews adjusted their calendar to get the Passover to begin on the 15th of Nissan, and that also had to be after the spring equinox.<br />There is evidence the Romans and Babylonians adjusted their calendars to start their New Year at the spring equinox.<br />The Greeks, what can we say about them? They had many, many calendars; each region had their own.<br /><br />What do we see? All of the cultures in that area had different criteria on how to adjust their calendars. The very basis of Hoeh's claim, of some sort of universal practice tying the winter solstice to a particular date, is pure bunk!<br /><br />Hoeh just ignored that altogether, and tried to apply our modern calendar to the ancient Near East. His notion was that, according to our Gregorian calendar, the winter solstice was on January 6 in Nimrod's time. But tying something 4,000 years ago to our calendar today leaps over that 4,000 years. You cannot tie things together, then assume the middle. It's anachronistic.<br /><br />Free Dictionary definition of "anachronism":<br />The representation of someone as existing or something as happening in other than chronological, proper, or historical order.<br /><br />It makes sense if you have no idea how things actually happened.xHWAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01061716053302210598noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-42718180525019803752013-12-18T22:24:50.808-05:002013-12-18T22:24:50.808-05:00The Babylonians used a lunar calendar, which means...The Babylonians used a lunar calendar, which means that if they celebrated Nimrod's birthday, it would shift every year on the Gregorian calendar. But it still wouldn't be on two dates. Hoeh must have wanted to make a connection between Zagmuk and the 12 days of Christmas but Zagmuk is a harvest celebration.Dillonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-88530328334091044072013-12-14T09:36:09.048-05:002013-12-14T09:36:09.048-05:00Can't help but agree, xHWA, especially about N...Can't help but agree, xHWA, especially about Nimrod's alleged birthday, and the winter solstice. Since the calendar has been more or less stabilized through the Julian calendar, the winter solstice has remained as December 21. Even if we accept the winter solstice as having been Nimrod's birthday, one can't assume the entire end of December should be labeled as "pagan", since scripture tells us that Jesus was in temple for the Festival of Lights (Hannukah).<br /><br />The Bible doesn't tell us when Nimrod was born, in fact it tells us very little about the man. It doesn't even tell us that he had a female consort, let alone providing her name. Most of what we "know" about him is based on the guesswork of those presenting themselves as authorities (led by Hislop), who connected the dots between a brief scriptural description, assorted myths, and some obscure historical figures. There is nothing really substantive to this speculation, as compared let's say, to what we know about Julius Caesar, Plato, or Confucius.<br /><br />I am constantly amazed that twenty years of my life were based on theories and guesswork, authoritatively presented as "the truth", and that members of my family are not only still deeply committed to this, but also preach it!<br /><br />BBByker Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15602697337552385535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-31573189364100841232013-12-10T15:00:44.980-05:002013-12-10T15:00:44.980-05:00This really exposes the depth to which thought ref...This really exposes the depth to which thought reform takes place in the splinters. The flawed and incorrect use of determining a fact by assuming a conclusion is signature Church of God methodology, as taught and perpetuated by Ambassador College and it's graduates. Teaching people how to think and what to think. Anything outside of it is satanic. This article exposes the subtleties of thought reform very well, convicting themselves by their own words. I hope this breaks through the bonds of fear.Pennyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02686879759672569354noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-22023432876260099682013-12-10T13:30:41.267-05:002013-12-10T13:30:41.267-05:00Thanks, Bob! Totally agreed.
Ya know, as I was ta...Thanks, Bob! Totally agreed.<br /><br />Ya know, as I was talking to a few friends this morning, something popped into my head.<br /><br />According to Hoeh, Nimrod's birthday originally was January 6. But more correctly, Nimrod's birthday was the winter solstice. <br />This means wherever the winter solstice is, there is Nimrod's birthday.<br /><br />Nimrod therefore has multiple birthdays! January 6 was Nimrod's birthday. January 5 was Nimrod's birthday. January 4 was Nimrod's birthday - and the 3rd, the 2nd, the 1st, and half of December as well. All of these are every bit as much Nimrod's birthday as December 25th ever was.<br /><br />Now.. one absolutely universal claim in Armstrongism is "once pagan; always pagan". This is the very reason anyone makes any to-do about Christmas at all. How often have I heard (and used to say), "You know, Christmas is just Deis Natalis Solis Invicti." Therefore, all of these dates should forever be every bit as much "pagan" as December 25th is accused of being. Anything that happens on any of these dates should be every bit as much "pagan" as Christmas is accused of being.<br />Add to that the fact that Saturnalia ended December 21st, and Divalia was on the 21st and Lorentalia was on the 23rd. <br /><br />When is the United Church of God Winter Family Weekend again?xHWAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01061716053302210598noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-88537611046839795892013-12-10T10:24:02.927-05:002013-12-10T10:24:02.927-05:00Excellent article! I've long said that the WC...Excellent article! I've long said that the WCG was influenced not only by the material contained in The Two Babylons, but worse yet, Alexander Hislop's methodology served as a blueprint amongst WCG senior management as to how research should be conducted. It was hardly the unbiased and objective following of an evidentiary trail. Like Hislop, they cherrypicked their "facts" in such a way as to support a foregone conclusion.<br /><br />Most of us, because of the ways in which we were indoctrinated and brainwashed, would have considered it as "blaspheming God's Apostle" to have done the fact checking which we should have done. I assumed that The Plain Truth told the truth. As it turns out, that magazine was more akin to the old Police Gazette or National Enquirer.<br /><br />BBByker Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15602697337552385535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5528158760608808912.post-75882575944929409462013-12-10T08:50:15.420-05:002013-12-10T08:50:15.420-05:00My apologies. I had a few AD's where BC's ...My apologies. I had a few AD's where BC's should have been. That's been corrected.xHWAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01061716053302210598noreply@blogger.com