Israel seems to have sold Jerusalem to the Vatican

The World awaits a man of Evil.  Has he shown his face?

Exclusive: A Seat for the Pope at King David's Tomb

Published: Friday, February 01, 2013      http://www.israelnationalnews.com

Israel seems to have sold Jerusalem to the Vatican.

An historic agreement has been drafted between Israel and the Vatican. The Israeli authorities have granted the Pope an official seat in the room where the Last Supper is believed to have taken place, on Mount Zion in Jerusalem, and where David and Solomon, Jewish kings of Judea, are considered by some researchers, to also be buried.


It is the culmination of a long campaign by the Catholic Church to regain religious stewardship over the place where Jesus is supposed to have broken bread and drunk wine with his disciples on the eve of his crucifixion.

This is an enormous issue pushed through without any public debate.


According to our sources, the agreement, which is expected to be ratified next June, gives the Pope a “special authority” over the second floor of the building, so that Christian pilgrims will be able to celebrate religious functions like Pope John Paul did in 2000.

The agreement constitutes Israel’s capitulation to the Vatican’s efforts to “Christianize” the holy site, like when a Catholic convent was built in Auschwitz.


The Catholic Church has long wanted control over part of the area on Mt. Zion so as to turn it into an international religious center for Catholics. The blueprint of the agreement reads as follows: “The Vatican hands over this use of the Cenacle to the Custody of the Holy Land which will keep the Cenacle open from 6 AM to 8 AM for the celebration of the Holy Mass”.  [1]

Apostolic Truth

Do not mix up Catholicism with the Christian faith.

Since the reformation, most Evangelical Christians have correctly belled the Pope as an antichrist. (Has he shown his face?)

This article is just another example that the Catholic faith is an anti-Zionist faith. It is simply impossible for God of Israel to support anti-Zionism.

The Pope is also a supporter of the PLO. The late Pope also kissed a Koran.

What more do you need to understand that both Islam and the Catholic faith has nothing to do with God of Israel?

Comment by Ivar

Has he shown his face?

Mat 24:20  But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the         sabbath day:

Jesus would surely have known the Church would abandon the Sabbath three hundred years after his death?

יט  אֱדַיִן, לְדָנִיֵּאל בְּחֶזְוָא דִי-לֵילְיָא--רָזָא גְלִי; אֱדַיִן, דָּנִיֵּאל, בָּרִךְ, לֶאֱלָהּ שְׁמַיָּא.	2:19 Then was the secret revealed unto Daniel in a vision of the night. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven.
כ  עָנֵה דָנִיֵּאל, וְאָמַר--לֶהֱוֵא שְׁמֵהּ דִּי-אֱלָהָא מְבָרַךְ, מִן-עָלְמָא וְעַד עָלְמָא:  דִּי חָכְמְתָא וּגְבוּרְתָא, דִּי לֵהּ-הִיא.	2:20 Daniel spoke and said: Blessed be the name of God from everlasting even unto everlasting; for wisdom and might are His;
כא  וְהוּא מְהַשְׁנֵא עִדָּנַיָּא, וְזִמְנַיָּא, מְהַעְדֵּה מַלְכִין, וּמְהָקֵים מַלְכִין; יָהֵב חָכְמְתָא לְחַכִּימִין, וּמַנְדְּעָא לְיָדְעֵי בִינָה.	2:21 And He changeth the times and the seasons; He removeth kings, and setteth up kings; He giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding;
כב  הוּא גָּלֵא עַמִּיקָתָא, וּמְסַתְּרָתָא; יָדַע מָה בַחֲשׁוֹכָא, ונהירא (וּנְהוֹרָא) עִמֵּהּ שְׁרֵא.	2:22 He revealeth the deep and secret things; He knoweth what is in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with Him.

 

כה  וּמִלִּין, לְצַד עליא (עִלָּאָה) יְמַלִּל, וּלְקַדִּישֵׁי עֶלְיוֹנִין, יְבַלֵּא; וְיִסְבַּר, לְהַשְׁנָיָה זִמְנִין וְדָת, וְיִתְיַהֲבוּן בִּידֵהּ, עַד-עִדָּן וְעִדָּנִין וּפְלַג עִדָּן.

7:25 And he shall speak words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High; and he shall think to change the seasons and the law; and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and half a time. The Hebrew Calendar Years are counted from the Era of Creation, or Era Mundi, which corresponds to -3760 October 7 on the Julian proleptic calendar. Each year consists of twelve or thirteen months, with months consisting of 29 or 30 days. An intercalary month is introduced in years 3, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17, and 19 in a nineteen-year cycle of 235 lunations. The initial year of the calendar, A.M. (Anno Mundi) 1, is year 1 of the nineteen-year cycle. The calendar for a given year is established by determining the day of the week of Tishri 1 (first day of Rosh Hashanah or New Year's Day) and the number of days in the year. Years are classified according to the number of days in the year (see Table 3.1.1). Table 3.1.1  Classification of Years in the Hebrew Calendar Deficient Regular Complete Ordinary year 353 354 355 Leap year 383 384 385 Table 3.1.2  Months of the Hebrew Calendar 1. Tishri 30 7. Nisan 30 2. Heshvan 29* 8. Iyar 29 3. Kislev 30** 9. Sivan 30 4. Tevet 29 10. Tammuz 29 5. Shevat 30 11. Av 30 6. Adar 29*** 12. Elul 29 * In a complete year, Heshvan has 30 days. ** In a deficient year, Kislev has 29 days. *** In a leap year Adar I has 30 days; it is followed by Adar II with 29 days.

"...and he shall think to change the seasons and the law;"

The Julian Calendar

The Julian calendar was the calendar in predominant use in most of Europe from 45 BC until it was superseded by the Gregorian calendar commencing in 1582, although it continued to be used as the civil calendar in some countries into the 20th century. The Gregorian calendar has now replaced the Julian calendar as the civil calendar in all countries which formerly used it. Most Christian denominations in the West and areas evangelized by Western churches have also replaced it with the Gregorian calendar as the basis for their liturgical calendars. However, most branches of the Eastern Orthodox Church still use the Julian calendar for calculating the dates of moveable feasts, including Easter(Pascha). Some Orthodox churches have adopted the Revised Julian calendar for the observance of fixed feasts, while other Orthodox churches retain the Julian calendar for all purposes.The Julian calendar is still used by the Berber people of North Africa and on Mount Athos, and is the basis for the Ethiopian calendar, which is the national standard (not used only by the Orthodox Church).
It was a reform of the Roman calendar introduced by Julius Caesar in 46 BC (708 AUC) to commence in 45 BC (709 AUC). The calendar has a regular year of 365 days divided into 12 months, as listed in Table of months. A leap day is added to February every four years. The Julian year is, therefore, on average 365.25 days long.

 "...and he shall think to change the seasons and the law;"

The Gregorian Calendar

The Gregorian calendar today serves as an international standard for civil use. In addition, it regulates the ceremonial cycle of the Roman Catholic and Protestant churches. In fact, its original purpose was ecclesiastical. Although a variety of other calendars are in use today, they are restricted to particular religions or cultures.

Months of the Gregorian Calendar

1. January	31	7. July	31
2. February	28*	8. August	31
3. March	31	9. September	30
4. April	30	10. October	31
5. May	31	11. November	30
6. June	30	12. December	31

* In a leap year, February has 29 days.

Apostolic Truth 

Primitive Christianity (“the first church”) in its earliest stages, was still monotheistic.

Most notably, from 313–316 bishops in North Africa struggled with other Christian bishops who had been ordained by Donatus in opposition to Caecilian. The African bishops could not come to terms and the Donatists asked Constantine to act as a judge in the dispute. Three regional Church councils and another trial before Constantine all ruled against Donatus and the Donatism movement in North Africa. In 317 Constantine issued an edict to confiscate Donatist church property and to send Donatist clergy into exile. More significantly, in 325 he summoned the Council of Nicaea, effectively the first Ecumenical Council (unless the Council of Jerusalem is so classified). The Council of Nicaea is most known for its dealing with Arianism and for instituting the Nicene Creed.

Constantine enforced the prohibition of the First Council of Nicaea against celebrating the Lord's Supper on the day before the Jewish Passover (14 Nisan) (see Quartodecimanism and Easter controversy).

This marked a definite break of Christianity from the Judaic tradition. From then on the Roman Julian Calendar, a solar calendar, was given precedence over the lunar Hebrew Calendar among the Christian churches of the Roman Empire.

Constantine made new laws regarding the Jews. They were forbidden to own Christian slaves or to circumcise their slaves.



Deuteronomy 32:39, “See now that I myself am He! There is no god besides Me . . .”

As a result of this and many other inspiring affirmations throughout the Jewish Scriptures,1 faithful Jews to this day will only worship the One life-giving God of Israel – alone.

No prophet in Tanach ever remained silent on this foundational teaching. As if with one voice, they pleaded with their often-wayward nation never to compromise their faith for anything other than the unwavering monotheism that they tirelessly preached. Over and over again, the Hebrew Bible declared with deliberate clarity in its most celebrated creeds that the Almighty alone is God, and there is no other. Nothing could ever be “screened” or “veiled” because the very survival of the Jewish people depended on it. The Torah intimately connects the faith in one indivisible God with the national experience of the Jewish people throughout their long history. Dreadful suffering was the consequence for any defection from the uncompromising monotheism that the Almighty demanded of His people.

Throughout the Jewish Scriptures, God never “screened or veiled his divine nature.” In fact, Isaiah unequivocally proclaimed that the Almighty did not reveal Himself in darkness or in a hidden or veiled fashion. The prophet, speaking in the Almighty’s name, declares that,

I have not spoken in secret, from somewhere in a land of darkness; I have not said to Jacob’s descendants, “Seek Me in vain.” I, the Lord, speak the truth; I declare what is right. (Isaiah 45:19)

Although the belief in the unity of God is taught and declared on virtually every page of the Jewish Scriptures, the doctrine of the Trinity is never mentioned anywhere throughout the entire corpus of the Hebrew Bible. Moreover, this doctrine is not to be found anywhere in the New Testament either because primitive Christianity, in its earliest stages, was still monotheistic. The authors of the New Testament were completely unaware that the Church they had fashioned would eventually embrace a pagan deification of a triune deity. Although the worship of a three-part godhead was well known and fervently venerated throughout the Roman Empire and beyond in religious systems such as Hinduism and Mithraism, it was quite distant from the Judaism from which Christianity emerged. However, when the Greek and Roman mind began to dominate the Church, it created a theological disaster from which Christendom has never recovered. By the end of the fourth century, the doctrine of the Trinity was firmly in place as a central tenet of the Church, and strict monotheism was formally rejected by Vatican councils in Nicea and Constantinople.2

When Christendom adopted a triune godhead from neighboring triune religious systems, it spawned a serious conundrum for post-Nicene Christian apologists. How would they harmonize this new veneration of Jesus as a being who is of the same substance as the Father with a New Testament that portrays Jesus as a separate entity, subordinate to the Father, and created by God? How would they now integrate the teaching of the Trinity with a New Testament that recognized the Father alone as God? In essence, how would Christian apologists merge a first century Christian Bible, which was monotheistic, with a fourth century Church which was not? [2]

The Council of Laodicea of around 365 decreed 59 laws

 "...and he shall think to change the seasons and the law;"

Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ. (Percival Translation).

Flavius Valerius Aurelius Constantinus Augustus


The Constantine Creed

“I renounce all customs, rites, legalisms, unleavened breads and sacrifices of lambs of the Hebrews, and all the other feasts of the Hebrews, sacrifices, prayers, aspirations, purifications, sanctifications, and propitiations, and fasts and new moons, and Sabbaths, and superstitions, and hymns and chants, and observances and synagogues. absolutely everything Jewish, every Law, rite and custom and if afterwards I shall wish to deny and return to Jewish superstition, or shall be found eating with Jews, or feasting with them, or secretly conversing and condemning the Christian religion instead of openly confuting them and condemning their vain faith, then let the trembling of Cain and the leprosy of Gehazi cleave to me, as well as the legal punishments to which I acknowledge myself liable. And may I be an anathema in the world to come, and may my soul be set down with Satan and the devils.”
(Stefano Assemani, Acta Sanctorium Martyrum Orientalium at Occidentalium, Vol. 1, Rome 1748, page 105)

Furthermore, any follower of the “Jewish Messiah” (Yeshua HaMashiach) who wished to join this “holy community” was compelled to adopt a different set of rules and customs. Subsequently special creeds were drafted, to which the Christian would have to swear such as:

“I accept all customs, rites, legalism, and feasts of the Romans, sacrifices. Prayers, purifications with water, sanctifications by Pontificus Maxmus (high priests of Rome), propitiations, and feasts, and the New Sabbath “So! dei” (day of the Sun, ), all new chants and observances, and all the foods and drinks of the Romans. In other words, I absolutely accept everything Roman, every new law, rite and custom, of Rome, and the New Roman Religion.”

Additionally, in approximately 365 AD, the Council of Laodicea wrote, in one of their canons:
Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day. Rather, honoring the Lord’s Day. But if any shall be found to be Judaizers, let them be anathema (against) from Christ”.

Note: Protestants are included as they still observe the holidays and sabbath of Rome, as in “are you going to church this coming Lord’s day”.

Concerning Antiochus Epiphanes…
He set up an image of Zeus in the Temple which was the Abomination of Desolation spoken of in Daniel 11. For 3 years, he continued to desecrate the Temple.

These were the new laws that Antiochus set up:

Thou shall profane the Sabbath
Thou shall change the set times (festivals) and laws
Thou shall set up idols
Thou shall eat unclean animals
Thou shall not circumcise
Thou shall forget Torah

3 years and 2 months later, the Temple was taken back and rededicated. This is known as the Feast of Dedication, or Festival of Lights, or Hanukkah.

What’s really is ironic…..these laws were created by an antichrist Antiochus, and are the same things Constantine would later repeat and this is what people want to live by today. Totally going against God’s Word. People today are living under laws created by Antiochus and Constantine; an antichrist. [3]


 "...and he shall think to change the seasons and the law;"

Exodus Chapter 20 שְׁמוֹת

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
8 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work;
9 but the seventh day is a sabbath unto the LORD thy God, in it thou shalt not do any manner of work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates;
10 for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested on the seventh day; wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. 

Mat 24:20  But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
Jesus would surely have known the Church would abandon the Sabbath three hundred years after his death?

The importance and sanctity of Shabbat can not be over stated. Shabbat is not a man made holy day based on the determination of some counsel of priests. Shabbat was set apart for special observance by God Himself! As we read in the Torah:

Genesis 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, along with everything in them. 
2 On the seventh day God was finished with his work which he had made, so he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. 
3 God blessed the seventh day and separated it as holy; because on that day God rested from all his work which he had created, so that it itself could produce.

Shabbat, the Sabbath or seventh day, stands unique among the days of the week. Shabbat was specifically set apart as holy (kodesh in the Hebrew) by God Himself. Of this word kodesh we read:

A primitive root; to be (causatively make, pronounce or observe as) clean (ceremonially or morally): - appoint, bid, consecrate, dedicate, hallow, (be, keep) holy (-er, place), keep, prepare, proclaim, purify, sanctify (-ied one, self), X wholly (Strong's: H6942).

This could not be any more clear. Shabbat is the most important ritual observance in biblical religion. Observing Shabbat is the sign that one is in a covenant relationship with HaShem. As our Messianic Siddur (prayer book) translates Exodus 31:13: "Above all, my Sabbaths you shall keep; for it is a sign between Me and you throughout your generations that you may know that I am the Lord who sanctifies you (page 12).

"Above all." This allows for no exceptions. There is not a single verse anywhere in the 66 books of the Bible that nullifies this direct command, nor a single verse sanctifying any other week day, including Sunday, as being kodesh (holy). As Y'hudey Y'shua Shabbat observance is not optional. Shabbat is the sign that we are part of the Brit Hadashah (New Covenant) -- that we have been "grafted into" or "adopted into" Judaism. [4]

Observing Shabbat is the sign, the mark which seperates us from the Beast


666 ~ Vicarius Filii Dei ~ 666 
The Scripture does not list a single text conveying infallibility to a church officer." If the Bible is silent on the subject of assigning Christ's power to one individual as supreme Pontiff of the church, then there must be a historical point where that claim was made. There is, in fact, one such document, and unfortunately, the origin of this claim is tainted with deception.
 
    It was not until the eighth century that the Roman Church proclaimed authority over all of God's churches through the succession of Peter's bishoprice. This was done with a forged document called  "Donation of Constantine."  It first appeared around the year 752 AD, four centuries after Constantine's death (337 AD).  Bearing the forged name of the fourth century emperor, Constantine the Great, it originated the doctrine of apostolic succession and first coined the name vicarius filii dei. 

    Although you are probably not fluent in Latin,  we will quote one sentence from the Latin of the Donation of Constantine.  This paper was confirmed by church council, incorporated in Roman Catholic canon law by Gratian, later endorsed by Pope Gregory XIII; and cited by the Catholic scholar and historian Lucius Ferraris, who proved that it is a forged document.

    Ut sicut Beatus Petrus in terris Vicarius Filii Dei fuit constitutus, ita et Pontifices eius successores in terris principatus potestatem amplius, quam terrenae imperialis nostrae serenitatis mansuetudo haber videtur"    Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Biblietheca, (edition of 1890), art, "Papa," II, Vol. VI, p. 43.

   Now, read  the  English rendering of  this Latin translation from the Canon law of Gratian, which you will recall, was allegedly penned by Constantine the Great:

As the blessed Peter is seen to have been constituted Vicar of the Son of God on the earth, so the pontiffs who are the representatives of that same chief of the apostles, should obtain from us and our empire the power of a supremacy greater than the clemency of our earthly imperial serenity.     Christopher B. Coleman, The Treatise of Lorenzo Valla on the Donation of Constantine, p. 13.

    If Constantine had, in fact, penned the former document, it would still not be authority to exalt the Bishoprice of one church over all others; yet this forged document actually became a "tool" to implement the doctrine of Papal supremacy and infallibility through Peter.  Was Peter ever an apostle to the non-Jewish churches? 

    First, Peter was not the Bishop of Rome, but was an apostle to the Jews.

    On the contrary, when they saw that to me [Paul] was committed [by God] the gospel for the uncircumcised [Gentiles], as to Peter that for the circumcised  [Jews] (for he [God] who worked in Peter for the apostleship of the circumcised [Jews] worked also in me among the Gentiles--and when they recognized the grace that was given to me, James and Cephas [Peter] and John, who were considered the pillars [of the Jerusalem church], gave to me and to Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles, and they [Peter, James and John]to the circumcised [Jews]....  Galatians 2:7-9, Douay

[1]  http://www.israelnationalnews.com

[2] http://www.outreachjudaism.org/articles/jesus-claim-to-be-god.html

[3]  http://natzrim.blogspot.com/2011/04/constantine-creed.html#lExDwm5OUkZa8isQ.99 


[4] The importance of Shabbat.  http://yeshivabethhashem.org/yeshiva/1lesson2.html

[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great

Jesus would surely have known the Church would abandon the Sabbath three hundred years after his death

Embracing Judaism and its columnists do not necessarily endorse or agree with every opinion expressed in every article posted on this site. While we are very grateful to the large number of Christian and Jewish authors who’s work has made this site possible, the fact that we carry one or several articles by an individual author or organization does not mean we necessarily agree with everything, or even anything else, that person or organization believes. Nor does the mention of any particular person in the body of an article not written by me, mean that I endorses that person. We do however, encourage a healthy and friendly debate on the issues of our day. Whether you agree or disagree, we encourage you to post your feedback by using the comment feature.

Please note: In Israel, Refusing COVID-19 Vaccination Means ‘Your Life Is Basically Over’ 

"Time of Jacob's Trouble" @   https://natzrim.blogspot.com/2010/12/time-of-jacobs-trouble.html

Puzzling, Jesus would surely have known the Church would abandon the Sabbath three hundred years after his death?

Mat 24:20  But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: 

See The Constantine Creed

365 AD, the Council of Laodicea wrote, in one of their canons:

Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day. Rather, honoring the Lord’s Day. But if any shall be found to be Judaizers, let them be anathema (against) from Christ”.

Concerning Antiochus Epiphanes…
He set up an image of Zeus in the Temple which was the Abomination of Desolation spoken of in Daniel 11. For 3 years, he continued to desecrate the Temple.

By 167 the enforced Hellenization of the Jews reached its peak; the Jews were compelled, under penalty of death "to depart from the laws of their fathers, and to cease living by the laws of God.


These were the new laws that Antiochus set up:

Thou shall profane the Sabbath
Thou shall change the set times (festivals) and laws
Thou shall set up idols
Thou shall eat unclean animals
Thou shall not circumcise
Thou shall forget Torah

3 years and 2 months later, the Temple was taken back and rededicated. This is known as the Feast of Dedication, or Festival of Lights, or Hanukkah. [1]

Daniel’s Prophecy of Antiochus Epiphanes

ANTIOCHUS IV EPIPHANES, son of Antiochus III, ruled from the death of his brother *Seleucus IV in 175 B.C.E. until his death in 164. His reign marks a turning point in Jewish history. Striving vigorously to restore the strength of the Seleucid Empire, Antiochus founded more new Greek cities than all his predecessors. He became the champion of an intense Hellenization, more as a result of personal tendencies than as a means of reunifying the divided kingdom. To this end Antiochus paid particular attention to the Jews of Palestine. *Onias III, the high priest, was replaced in 173 by *Jason who had strong leanings toward the Hellenistic party in Jerusalem. In time the character of the Jewish capital itself was altered, with Jason undertaking "to register the Jerusalemites as citizens of Antioch" (II Macc. 4:9; on the legal status of Jerusalem under the government of the Hellenizers see V. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews (1959), 161 ff.). Jason was eventually outbid for the office of high priest by Menelaus, who proved even more servile and prepared to carry out the most extreme Hellenization of Judea. In 168 Antiochus set out on his second expedition to Egypt. Wishful thinking probably promoted the spread of false rumors regarding the king's death, and as a result, Jason, who had fled to Transjordan, returned to Jerusalem and tried to reestablish his rule. On returning from Egypt, Antiochus, convinced that a rebellion had broken out against him, stormed the city, killed thousands of Jews, and sold thousands more into slavery. In their place, and especially in the citadel of Jerusalem (*Acra) which was erected on the instructions of Antiochus, a Greek community was set up, thus outwardly transforming the city into a foreign polis (city-state). 

By 167 the enforced Hellenization of the Jews reached its peak; the Jews were compelled, under penalty of death "to depart from the laws of their fathers, and to cease living by the laws of God. Further, the sanctuary in Jerusalem was to be polluted and called after Zeus Olympius" (II Macc. 6:1, 2). The nature of these decrees has puzzled most scholars and students of the Hellenistic period. Ancient polytheism for the most part was tolerant, and this particular brand of Hellenization was not applied by Antiochus to any segment of the non-Jewish population under his rule. It would seem, therefore, that religious oppression appeared to Antiochus to be the only means of achieving political stability in Palestine, since it was that country's religion, if anything, that was out of place in a predominantly Hellenized empire. It would be wrong, however, completely to disregard the nature of the king himself. His strange behavior, causing contemporaries to refer to him as Epimanes ("madman") instead of Epiphanes, obviously played a major part in the formation of such violent policies. In any case, Antiochus did not personally oversee the implementation of these policies. He died in the city of Tabae (Isfahan). He was succeeded by his nine-year-old son Antiochus V Eupator (Polybius 26:10; 31:3–4; Livius 41:19, 20; Diodorus 29:32; 31:16; for a summation of modern literature on Antiochus IV see Tcherikover, op. cit., 175–203). [2]

Daniel’s Prophecy of Antiochus Epiphanes

BY JASON JACKSON

“The Most High God rules the kingdom of mankind and sets over it whom he will” (Dan. 5:21, ESV). Belshazzar knew this, but he disregarded the hard-learned lesson of Nebuchadnezzar (v. 22). He was, therefore, weighed in the balances. Likewise, all who live with a disregard for the Most High God are found wanting (v. 27).

Babylonian Captivity furnished the context for this great message. Daniel, the prophet — in that way Jesus Christ referred to him (Matt. 24:15) — recorded selective events to demonstrate the truth that God is in control.

In the first six chapters of the book, Daniel and friends appeared healthier than the other chosen youths, though they subsisted on a meager diet, refusing to compromise their convictions (Dan. 1). By divine direction, Daniel told and interpreted Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, which was a testimony of what God would do in history (Dan. 2).

The Lord intervened to save the three Hebrew youths, although the most powerful man in the world had ordered their execution (Dan. 3). The proud tyrant did Jehovah make “to lie down in green pastures.” After which, Nebuchadnezzer confessed, “… those who walk in pride he is able to humble” (Dan. 4:37).

The demise of Babylon and Belshazzar were the Lord’s doing (Dan. 5). And Daniel’s harmless night in the lions’ den convinced Darius that the God of Daniel, “… he is the living God, enduring forever; his kingdom shall never be destroyed, and his dominion shall be to the end” (Dan. 6:26).

From the beginning to the end of captivity in Babylon, these special events showed that God rules the kingdom of mankind.

In the latter half of the book, Daniel reports a series of visions. Daniel, through divine inspiration, sees and records events yet-to-be. The mere fact that God reveals the future proves his power and sovereignty (cf. Is. 44:24—45:13). These predicted events were exactly fulfilled, demonstrating yet again — the Most High God rules, even as evil men work out unwittingly God’s providential desires.

Skeptics have alleged that such events were certainly recorded after the fact — the work of a historian and not a prophet. Peter C. Craigie notes the importance of the interpretation of Daniel, as he says, “in the minds of some”:

“The dreams of Daniel, if taken as sixth century productions, clearly and accurately predict the course of Near Eastern history down to the middle of the second century B.C. (at least), and are a testimony to the accuracy of God’s special revelation to Daniel. On the other hand, it is precisely the concurrence between the substance of the visions and the actual history of the Near East which compels other interpreters to claim that the visions must have been written after the events they describe” (The Old Testament: Its Background, Growth and Content, Nashville: Abingdon, 1986, p. 246).

The thought of predictive prophecy is more than the humanistic mind can bear, so many have become dedicated to convincing themselves — and others — that the book of Daniel must be the work of a second century unknown mystery writer. Robert D. Wilson, in his mammoth work, Studies in the book of Daniel, concludes:

“Now, in the works already published and elsewhere in this volume, we have endeavoured to show, that the objections against Daniel based upon the alleged inaccuracy of its statements about the age of Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus are unfounded, that the argument from silence as illustrated in Ecclesiasticus and other cases is fallacious, that the argument from Daniel’s place in the present Hebrew Bible has no basis to rest on, and that the origin and influence of its ideas and its background including its language are in harmony with its claims to have been written in the sixth century B.C. in a Babylonian environment” (Vol. 2, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1972, p. 271).

If the book of Daniel is the product of Daniel the prophet, then the point is proven and undeniable: God rules. This theological conclusion will forever be unacceptable to some, in that same way that some saw Lazarus raised from the dead and still refused to believe that Jesus was the Christ. In spite of indisputable evidence, the prophet will remain under attack, which assault inadvertently reminds us of the apologetic potency of the book of Daniel.

In the sixth century B.C., Daniel wrote,

“Behold, three more kings shall arise in Persia, and a fourth shall be far richer than all of them. And when he has become strong through his riches, he shall stir up all against the kingdom of Greece” (Dan. 11:2).

The prediction of Greece as a succeeding world power to the Persian empire is itself amazing; the fall of Persia and the rise of Alexander’s Empire were two hundred years in the future at the time of Daniel’s vision.

Yet, Daniel’s predictions become even more detailed. Concerning the rise of Alexander the Great, he says,

“Then a mighty king shall arise, who shall rule with great dominion and do as he wills” (Dan. 11:3).

The premature death of Alexander is rehearsed in many sixth grade text books, and the division of his kingdom into four parts, assumed by four military leaders, is also well-known. Daniel foresaw these events:

“And as soon as he has arisen, his kingdom shall be broken and divided toward the four winds of heaven, but not to his posterity, nor according to the authority with which he ruled, for his kingdom shall be plucked up and go to others besides these” (Dan. 11:4).

Two of these divisions of Alexander’s empire are prominent in the subsequent part of Daniel’s vision — the kings of the North and South (Dan. 11:5-20). We know them as the Seleucid and Ptolemy dynasties. The facts of the campaigns and conflicts between these powers are easily reviewed with a good encyclopedia, and the careful reader will observe the “concurrence between the substance of the visions and the actual history of the Near East” (Craigie, p. 246).

In Daniel 11:21-35, the prophet reveals the rise and rule of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Seleucid king who reigned from 175-164 B.C. Daniel’s prediction involves the rise of Antiochus to power, the conflicts of Antiochus with Egypt (i.e., the king of the South), and his hostilities towards Israel.

The Encyclopaedia Britannica 2003 Deluxe Edition states:

“Antiochus was the third son of Antiochus III the Great. After his father’s defeat by the Romans in 190—189, he served as hostage for his father in Rome from 189 to 175, where he learned to admire Roman institutions and policies. His brother, King Seleucus IV, exchanged him for Demetrius, the son of Seleucus; and after Seleucus was murdered by Heliodorus, a usurper, Antiochus in turn ousted him” (“Antiochus IV Epiphanes,” Britannica Corp, 2003.).

The demise of Seleucus IV preceded Antiochus’ rise to power, and Daniel prophesies the untimely end of Seleucus (Dan. 11:20-21).

“Then shall arise in his [Antiochus III] place one [Seleucus IV] who shall send an exactor of tribute for the glory of the kingdom. But, within a few days he shall be broken, neither in anger nor in battle” (v. 20).

Seleucus IV, brother of Antiochus, succeeded his father Antiocus III the Great. Apparently, Seleucus sent Heliodorus to plunder the temple in Jerusalem, but he returned empty-handed. Gleason Archer observes,

“No other details are given in this verse of the twelve-year reign of this rather ineffectual king, except that he did not die in battle or in a mob action as had his father, Antiochus. Yet Seleucus IV met an untimely end through poison administered by Heliodorus” (Expositor Bible Commentary, Vol. 7, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985, p. 134).

And Daniel foresaw,

“In his [Seleucus IV] place shall arise a contemptible person to whom royal majesty has not been given. He shall come in without warning and obtain the kingdom by flatteries” (Dan. 11:21).

Although Demetrius, the son of Seleucus IV, was the rightful successor, Antiochus determined to seize control.

Antiochus’ rise to power corresponded to the following predictions by Daniel, the prophet of the Most High God:

1. Antiochus would come to power after the untimely death of his predecessor.
2. He was a contemptible person, thus he was called by many Antiochus Epimanes (i.e., the madman) instead of his preferred appellation Epiphanes (i.e., God Manifest).
3. He was not an heir to the throne, indeed to him “royal majesty has not been given.”
4. Antiochus did not lead a bloody coup, but he obtained “the kingdom by flatteries.” Edward J. Young writes, “By flattery he won over the kings of Pergamus to his cause, and the Syrians gave in peaceably” (The Prophecy of Daniel, Grand Rapids: Eerdmands, 1977, p. 241).

These specific details, prophesied about 350 years before they transpired, were fulfilled in Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The time and manner of his rise to power were foretold in the book of Daniel — the Most High rules the kingdom of men.

The conflicts of Antiochus IV with Egypt are predicted in Daniel 11:22-30, which details are amazing. The relevance to the biblical scheme is that these campaigns bring him into direct contact with Israel, since Palestine is between Syria and Egypt. Note the prophetic specifics concerning the hostilities of Antiochus against Israel:

“At the time appointed he shall return and come into the south, but it shall not be this time as it was before. For ships of Kittim shall come against him, and he shall be afraid and withdraw, and shall turn back and be enraged and take action against the holy covenant. He shall turn back and pay attention to those who forsake the holy covenant. Forces from him shall appear and profane the temple and fortress, and shall take away the regular burnt offering. And they shall set up the abomination that makes desolate. He shall seduce with flattery those who violate the covenant, but the people who know their God shall stand firm and take action. And the wise among the people shall make many understand, though for some days they shall stumble by sword and flame, by captivity and plunder. When they stumble, they shall receive a little help. And many shall join themselves to them with flattery, and some of the wise shall stumble, so that they may be refined, purified, and made white, until the time of the end, for it still awaits the appointed time” (Dan. 11:29-35).

1. The hostilities of Antiochus IV against Israel would happen during more than one Egyptian conflict (Dan. 11:29-30).
2. Antiochus would take military control of Jerusalem, and especially the temple: “Forces from him shall appear …” (v. 31a).
3. He would cause the sacrifices to cease: “Forces from him shall appear and profane the temple and fortress, and shall take away the regular burnt offering” (v. 31).
4. He would “set up the abomination that makes desolate” (v. 31b).
5. Antiochus would prefer and protect those who “violate the covenant” (v. 32a).
6. Antiochus would meet resistance (vv. 32b-33).
7. The righteous would suffer intense persecution (vv. 33-34a).
8. There would be imposters among the righteous (v. 34b).
9. These events would result in a purification of the people of God (v. 35).

In view of these verses, consider the following excerpt:

“Antiochus’ hellenizing policies brought him into conflict with the prosperous Oriental temple organizations, and particularly with the Jews. Since Antiochus III’s reign the Jews had enjoyed extensive autonomy under their high priest. They were divided into two parties, the orthodox Hasideans (Pious Ones) and a reform party that favoured Hellenism. For financial reasons Antiochus supported the reform party and, in return for a considerable sum, permitted the high priest, Jason, to build a gymnasium in Jerusalem and to introduce the Greek mode of educating young people. In 172, for an even bigger tribute, he appointed Menelaus in place of Jason. In 169, however, while Antiochus was campaigning in Egypt, Jason conquered Jerusalem—with the exception of the citadel—and murdered many adherents of his rival Menelaus. When Antiochus returned from Egypt in 167 he took Jerusalem by storm and enforced its Hellenization. The city forfeited its privileges and was permanently garrisoned by Syrian soldiers.” (“Antiochus IV Epiphanes,” The Encyclopaedia Britannica 2003 Deluxe Edition, Britannica Corp, 2003).

Skeptics allege that these events were recorded after the fact — that is, they were the work of an historian and not a prophet. They reject the possibility of predictive prophecy, therefore any other explanation will do.

Source 
[1]  http://natzrim.blogspot.com/2011/04/constantine-creed.html#VDTGWrqCR7sddUo8.99 
[2] http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0002_0_01155.html

[3] https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/1191-daniels-prophecy-of-antiochus-epiphanes

HOLINESS

Speak unto all the congregation of the children of Israel, and say unto them: Ye shall be holy; for I the LORD your God am holy. 

IMITATION OF GOD (Imitatio Dei)

This commandment is given to the entire community.

God only commands something that we are capable of fulfilling. Failure comes in because we underestimate our abilities.

You do not have to separate yourself from society and go meditate in a forest to become holy. These mitzvot are not for angels. They are mainly interpersonal commandments, such as honoring parents, feeding the poor, not slandering, and not hating in our heart. Being a contributing part of society is a personal obligation. Everyone should aspire to elevate himself, and at the same time aspires to elevate the community. That's why the command to be holy, kedoshim t'hiyu – is written in the plural.

This commandment is given to the entire community. If your being holy enhances your connection to the community, then you are behaving correctly. But if it causes a separation between you and those around you, that is incorrect. Our actions  should always be gauged by what will bring the biggest Kiddush Hashem, sanctification of God’s Holy Name.

Performing altruistic acts without the expectation of reciprocity is one of the greatest godly-attributes. Most religions of the East and West are bogged down by the pre-occupation with what God is or isn’t. For certain, the more we attempt to paint a picture or imagine what He looks like, the more elusive will become the effort to find Him. Emphasizing deed over creed will prove more productive.

The doctrine of the imitation of God is related to the biblical account of the creation of man in the image of God, which acknowledges a resemblance between man and his Creator. Yet man is to imitate God, not impersonate Him (see Gen. 3:5). The main biblical sources for the injunction to imitate God are found in the command to be holy as God is holy and to walk in God's way (Lev. 19:2; Deut. 10:12, 11:22, 26:17).

Man is to be God-like in his actions, but he cannot aspire to be God. This distinguishes the biblical notion from the pagan attempts to achieve apotheosis or absorption in the deity. 
Man is to imitate God in loving the stranger (Deut. 10:18–19); in resting on the Sabbath (Ex. 20:10–11); and in other ethical actions.

"Be like Him. Just as He is gracious and merciful, so be thou also gracious and merciful" 
What is meant is that man ought to walk after [imitate] the attributes of God. Just as the Lord clothes the naked, so you shall clothe the naked. Just as He visits the sick, so you shall visit the sick. Just as the Lord comforted the bereaved, so you shall also comfort the bereaved; just as He buried the dead, so you shall bury the dead"
   
A person should not adhere to a standard of holiness that could have a negative effect on the community.  source:

HOLINESS:

1) The essence of the holiness which every person must strive for is to observe the Covenant in purity. The way to achieve this is by sanctifying the way you speak. You must speak only words of holiness and keep yourself from any lapse into language which is not holy. Then whatever you say will be in `the Holy Tongue,' and through this you will achieve the holiness of the Covenant (19).

2) You must sanctify your mouth, your nose, your eyes and your ears. You must guard your mouth against words of falsehood and anything else which falls short of holiness. You must develop your fear of Heaven in order to sanctify your nostrils. Your ears will be holy when you believe in the Sages and listen to their words. And you must close your eyes and shut out anything which is not good for you to see. The sanctity you attain will bring you perfect understanding, and you will have wisdom, which is God's blessing, and ruach hakodesh, the holy spirit. Another way of sanctifying your nostrils, is if you are humble and patient and do not burst out in anger if someone insults you (The Hebrew expression for anger is a `burning in the nostrils'). The way to sanctify your ears is to be one who is `faithful in spirit and concealeth a matter' (Proverbs 11:13) he is careful not to reveal a secret which there is no need to reveal (21).

3) One who is prepared to sacrifice himself for the sake of sanctifying God's Name will attain peace, and through this the ability to speak holy words of Torah and prayer and to bind the thoughts in the mind to the words which the mouth is speaking. In order to pray with devotion, have in mind that you are willing to sacrifice yourself entirely in order to sanctify God's Name. To achieve perfect prayer, you must pray with a spirit of total self sacrifice (80).

4) It has been proved many times that even the most worthless of Jews, even the sinners of Israel are prepared to sacrifice themselves for the sanctification of God's Name if someone tries to force them to violate the Torah. Each day you should remind yourself that you would be ready to give your life to sanctify God's Name. This is the essence of Israel's holiness. You will then attain peace and be able to pray with true devotion (Ibid.).

5) When you recite the Shema you should say the words in a spirit of total self-sacrifice for the sake of God's Name. Picture in your mind the four death penalties imposed by the Beth Din stoning, strangulation, burning and the sword. You should imagine every detail so vividly that you can literally feel the pain of dying. Thought has a very great power. By imagining yourself dying you can literally come to feel the pangs of death. But be careful not to dwell on these thoughts for too long, because otherwise your soul could literally leave you, God forbid, causing premature death (195).

6) Self-sacrifice for the sake of God brings unity to the worlds above (260).
7) There are certain Tzaddikim who have a very great name and who are known very widely. Yet people hold them in contempt and talk against them. They suffer mercilessly because of this, but it is something they take on themselves in order to sanctify God's Name, and because of it they can save thousands of Jewish souls from slaughter and death, God forbid (Ibid.).

8) Each person has something in his life which is more of a barrier for him than anything else. This is precisely the barrier he has to break in order to serve God. This is his task in life. It is his own way of sacrificing himself. Someone who is very afraid of dying must be more ready than anyone to give up his life to sanctify God's Name (Rabbi Nachman's Wisdom 57).

SOURCE: ADVICE from RABBI NACHMAN