Richard Ritenbaugh, focusing on Psalm 83:4-8, which describes the hideous character traits of Israel's ancient enemies, identifies descendants of Amalek, a particularly proud and hate-filled man, assembling a confederacy of vengeful peoples having ties to the lineage of Ishmael and Esau, all bearing an ever-burning hatred for the descendants of Jacob. The descendants of Esau (the Edomites) have perpetually hated the descendants of Jacob, pursuing them with a sword, cowardly attacking the weakest, showing no pity, constantly nurturing their wrath in supercilious satanic pride. As a result of Saul's failure to follow God's instruction to eliminate all the Amalekites, their remnants later re-emerged in Persia, as recorded in the Book of Esther. Haman was the treacherous and deceitful offspring of King Agag, and Mordecai was the godly descendant of King Saul. Their pairing in the Book of Esther provides a sequel to the unfinished story of I Samuel 15. Haman, like a 5th century Hitler plotting a 5th century holocaust, hated Mordecai so much (because he would not bow down to him) that he wanted to destroy his entire people. Tricking the gullible and inept King Ahasuerus to execute a genocidal order against the Jews, promising a sizeable cash bounty for the execution of the so-called "enemies to the state," Haman cast lots to determine the day this would be carried out. God, controlling the outcome of the fall, sovereignly, allowed enough time for Mordecai and Esther to foil the plan. As a sort of poetic justice, God brought about the execution of Haman and evil sons on the very pole the deceitful schemer has created for the purpose of slaying Mordecai. The Israel of God still lives in perilous times when the descendants of Amalek are ready to decapitate God's people. For their implacable hatred -put into-action, God will blot out the name of Amalek and descendants forever.
Richard T. Ritenbaugh: When studying a biblical topic, it is always helpful to begin with a plain, unambiguous statement that provides a fundamental understanding of the subject. ...
Mike Ford, observing that we are being carpet-bombed by Christmas tunes this time of the year, reflects that a scarcity of information exists in the literature of the Church of the Great God about the pagan origin of the event adjacent to Saturnalia festival—New Year’s Eve. An article appeared in the 1964 Plain Truth magazine, penned by William H. Ellis, titled The Plain Truth About NEW YEAR'S EVE!, drawing on the primary source 4,000 Years of Christmas, authored by Episcopal priest Earl Count who, although recognizing the pagan origins of the mid-winter fire festivals, embraces these syncretized customs as “Christian” customs, morphed from pagan to Christian under the watchful care of the Church Fathers. Pope Gregory, a rabid anti-Semite, proclaimed January 1, 1578 as the day Judaism allegedly ended and Christianity begun, allowing taxation and confiscating of Jewish property and eventually death to Jews who refused to convert to Catholicism. Pope Sylvester, whose sainthood day is commemorated on December 31, urged that the New Year be brought in by killing Jews. New Year’s celebrations often involve drunkenness, debauchery, and adultery. From these customs and traditions of the world, rooted in the Babylonian system, we have been commanded to extricate ourselves.
Richard T. Ritenbaugh: This weekend marks the beginning of a new sacred year; in fact, this Sabbath is the first day of the year on the Hebrew calendar. God tells Moses in Exodus 12:2, “This month shall ...
John Ritenbaugh shows that Deuteronomy 16:1-8 refers to Unleavened Bread rather than Passover (a scribal error, perhaps referring to the season). Ten clues clear up this misconception: 1) The month of Abib refers to Israel's leaving Egypt the day after the Passover. 2) The Egyptians would not have buried their dead in the middle of the night. 3) Exodus 12 and Numbers 9 indicate the Passover lamb was killed at ben ha arbayim (twilight) rather than ba erev (day's end). 4) Deuteronomy 16:2 commands that this offering could be bovine (Hebrew bakar). 5) The "passover" in verses 5-6 was not permitted to be sacrificed within their gates, contradicting the original command. 6) Verse 6 refers to the day Israel left Egypt. 7) Verse 6 uses bashal, a sacrifice boiled in water rather than roasted. 8) Verse 4 refers to Unleavened Bread and 9) the thank offering of the Night to Be Much Observed, and 10) Unleavened Bread lasts seven days, exclusive of Passover.
John Ritenbaugh, cautioning against the danger of presumption, warns against assigning biblical types (like Joshua and Zerubbabel) to any contemporary ministers, pointing out that, except for a few superficial similarities, there are not enough parallels or grounds of comparison to make such an inferential leap. Two major assumptions made by calendar changers are that: (1) the calendar is too complicated and (2) the Jews are guilty of deliberate manipulation in order to create a calendar that is more convenient in actual usage. The Bible nowhere says that the calendar should be simple; everything God has created, including life Bible, the calendar, as well as life itself, is complex. God, totally faithful and reliable, gave us a calendar, assigning the responsibility for its maintenance to the nation of Israel, not to the church or private individuals, guaranteeing order, stability, and unity within the culture. The Anti-Christ inspires tampering with times.
John Ritenbaugh reiterates that if God had accepted the calendar for 1600 years, it would be presumptuous for one living at the end of days to call it flawed. This calendar issue had surfaced during the tenure of Herbert W. Armstrong's apostleship and was thoroughly studied and systematically resolved. God assigned the tribe of Judah to be the caretakers of the calendar (as part of the oracles; Romans 3:2) The real issue in this controversy is faith in God's sovereignty and His faithfulness. The church does not exist in a vacuum, but as a subset of, subject to the ordinances of the Commonwealth of Israel (and Judah), with whom the Covenants were made. The need for precision, consistency and predictability censures any misguided attempts at establishing home made calendars.
John Ritenbaugh takes issue with those who feel that the perennial calendar controversy was never understood, investigated or resolved by Herbert Armstrong. After a lengthy study in the 1940s, he concluded: (1) there are not enough rules in the Bible to establish a calendar. (2) God had given no authority to anyone outside the Bible to establish a calendar. (3) The oracles of God had been committed to the Jews (Romans 3:1-2), and nobody else. The issue is not mathematical or astronomical, but instead a matter of trust in God's faithfulness, authority, sovereignty, oversight, or ability to govern. If we did not have revelation (including the provision of a calendar) from God, presumptuously trying to establish a calendar independently has led to, and will continue to lead to chaos and confusion.
John Ritenbaugh reiterates that Josiah's temple Passover observance (II Chronicles 34) was supervised by the king so they wouldn't revert back to paganism. The only proof text of the 15th Passover advocates (Deuteronomy 16:1) has been edited or tampered with in order to reflect the practice following the Babylonian captivity of calling both Passover and Unleavened Bread "Passover." The context of Deuteronomy 16:1-3, referring to cattle sacrifices and unleavened bread suggest the real focus of these verses is on the Night to be Observed and the Days of Unleavened Bread rather than the Passover.
Receive Biblical truth in your inbox—spam-free! This daily newsletter provides a starting point for personal study, and gives valuable insight into the verses that make up the Word of God. See what over 145,000 subscribers are already receiving.