THE CHRISTMAS LIE: It's Bigger Than You Think




 The mystery of the "Patron Saint" of CHRIST-MASS is no mystery. "Saint Nicholas", known as an amibigious "early saint" who suddenly acquires a new history called "tradition" in the after-math of the Iconoclast wars in 847 CE. Find out how the "Patron Saint" of CHRIST-MASS, "Saint Nicolas" was long known before 847 CE and how he, as the association today suggests, is the actual "founder" of CHRIST-MASS (father Christ-Mass).  What you are not told is that when he "founded" this syncretistic practice between paganism and NT faith, it was called unclean filth and condemned to eternal damnation.  The words are recorded by the writers of the New Testament, along with this "Patron Saint" whose followers are cursed by John in his vision of the risen Christ.  The Mythical Character Santa Clause derived from the Patron Saint Nicolas, was actually brought to life through incorporation of Masonic symbolism, looking back to Nimrod, king of Babylon, [founder of the "legend of the Craft"] in Masonry, and the proto-type of the Antichrist! And what do these origins all share in common that is beyond any reasonable coincidence! A man named CERINTHUS, looked to by both MASONS, and "Latin Church Historians" as the historical origin of CHRISTMAS!  CERINTHUS, the NICOLAITAN, and identified by the Apostle John in person, AS THE ANTICHRIST, who was ALREADY IN THE WORLD... at ancient EPHESUS, 19 centuries ago. Christian Fundemantalists flooding the internet with the warning that Santa is really "Satan", while mocked by the arrogant for their lack of sophistry, are actually stating an accurate fact that is born out in by historical documentation published by Cornell University in 1984. And if that were not all bad enough already, YES, SAINT NICHOLAS WAS A PEDOPHILE.  AND IN FACT THE ACTUAL FOUNDER OF THE PRACTICE IN THE ROMAN CHURCH.




(Father Christmas)

Rev 2:15  So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. 
Rev 2:6  But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. 


Joh 8:44  Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. 
...there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: 
for he is a liar, and the father of it. 

Before beginning this section, it must be stated the following critique is not intended to simply conduct an offense for the purpose of creating an offense to anyone. Groups such as Roman Catholicism and Freemasonry enjoy the telling of, and the hearing of, all the deceit of this time of year.  And as any American should be, are fully entitled to indulge such deceit. And it certainly should create no offense to simply call it, what everyone knows it is.  Nor should anyone in America ever wish to take away the right of those who wish to be deceived, to deceive themselves, in a free country, where people died to give Americans the right, to hear the truth or  to enjoy deceiving themselves, and teaching that deceit to their children.  But it is both unfair and unAmerican to expect, because you are busy lying to everyone, including your own child, that no one therefore should have the freedom to also politely and in a civil manner, call you out for doing it.  

But this isn't really written to persuade or address these groups and there adherents to begin with. It is written for those who are usually unknowingly the subject of these deceptions and are not particularly fond of being on the receiving end of these deceptions.  And to the extent that these groups, dedicated to societal deceit, for the good of their own, have infiltrated America's Evangelical/Protestant/Christian communities and deceived others, often through the pulpits operating as impostures, this research has been collected.  Not to offend the happy deceivers, but to call the unfortunately deceived, to repentance, among a community where repentance was both it's historical heritage and once the norm.

Because of the fact this is dealing with a MAJOR SYMBOL touching on the Roman Empire's MYSTERY RELIGION hidden within Romanism and Freemasonry, like the unholy worship ritual itself, virtually everything told about "Saint Nicholas" has been very carefully crafted to separate it, from the "esoteric truth" which remains the valued personal property of a few snobbish elite people, that rarely include the common ranks of it's own klans.  

If you talk to a Roman Catholic about any legendary Saint, they will be more than happy to explain their long detailed and extremely particular history of how they all glowed in the dark, floated in the air, died as a holy martyr, in defense of "Christian Faith", just after miraculously healing or raising from the dead anywhere from a few people to dozens. Their stories will also include being visited personally by angelic celebrities, or a host of angels, and rotten corpse material that when touched, did something (anything) miraculous, depending on the Vatican mythologists handling the PR of their "Sainthood". 

And you have to tread cautiously because if you insist they so much as did not glow in the dark, you make some of these people very unhappy.  Your failure to affirm their particular historical delusion is taken, not as an objective critical thought, but as a personal affront and insult. Just like children do, when told there is no Santa-Clause by other children. It is the little religious liar they think should be rewarded, and the future scientist, investigator, journalist  or scholar scolded into silence and shame.  And that religious philosophy which abhors truth, and favors deceit, runs throughout it's entire edifice, from the youngest to the oldest. - CLICK HERE TO SEE ROME'S PAST HISTORY CONCERNING "SAINTS & RELICS"

The frequent divorces from reality that must be employed are never bothersome, as they are happily offering their spiritual duty to the Roman Empire and it's lord god, the Pope, or it's Masonic worshipful master.  And any conscience about any of it, would have been snuffed out decades ago in their own childhoods, practicing these rituals of deceit designed to condition them to do precisely that.

But often in real life, the raw facts of history reveal quite another story about many of these "Saints" and fictitious super-heroes, some of whom never even existed at all, or were so embellished by lies, the reality of who they really were, was long ago intentionally buried in an ocean of "pious deceit".  And "Saint Nicholas" among all of these fictional Saints, is both one of the earliest and oldest examples in Vatican (and Masonic) history, to garner this kind of helpful deceit.  A central figure, to both esoteric religious philosophies of power through deceit, whose principle function remains even to this day, ritualized in an act of yearly deceit of children to teach them the association of deceit with both God and religion. And a social ethic which teaches the persecution of any who speak the truth,, and rewards deceivers who "go along".

Liars always talk louder when they are telling a lie, and the truth is always spoken softly, because even if said with but a whisper, it's already screaming at us inside.  And this is what Liars must drowned out with the the volume of their noise, in the same way the hundreds of Prophets of Baal sang and danced and beat their drums before a singular Elijah.

And if you are tempted to think at the outset that how can all this be? Remember to ask yourself these critical questions. If you can do nothing else but remember these simple questions, as a believer, or a seeker, they will guide you to the truth, concerning this unholy man, who really did live, really was the "father of Christmas", really did seduce children and really is a liar, just like his father.


(1) Do real "Saints" encourage,  practice, participate, approve of, give credence to, endorse, promote, attend, or even "bless" religious deceit?  No. Quite the opposite is true about "real saints" who really know God, because they know God is a spirit and must be worshiped in "spirit and truth".  

Practitioners of deceit, do not even make it into God's presence in the Scriptures.  And neither did this "Bishop"(sic), if it's fair to even misuse the title in reference to him that way without dishonoring those who really were.  

(2) And do "real Saints" permit "Christians" to "idolize" them to such extent that they seduce "followers" who literally make images, statues and idols of them in order to pray to and worship as God? In violation of both the first and greatest commandment of God? No, of course not. 

But this impostor certainly did, and still does.

(3) And do "real saints" seduce and victimized children, in order to sexually exploit and abuse, and in particular, use vulnerable heart-broken orphans, in order to indulge the Roman customary practices of pedastry and pedophilia to satisfy his personal appetite for aberrant sexual lusts against children? 

No of course not, yet there is a very very very good chance, (if not a certainty) not only did this man do precisely that, he was in all probability, the very "Father" of it in the Roman Catholic Church, where it has remained a shamefully permanent despicable hidden institution & sanctioned practice up into our very own day.

That's who the real "Saint Nicholas" actually was.  Not a "Saint" by any means, just a "Nicholas", and his followers not "Christians", but "Nicolaitans". And below we will show the proof of this origin (his true origin), not from anyone's fairy tales, traditions, rumers or myths, but from the most reliable documents known in Christiandom still to this day.

Joh_8:31  Jesus, therefore, said unto the Jews who believed in him,
`If ye may remain in my word, truly my disciples ye are, and ye shall know the truth, 


Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate

Contrary to the claims of the Apologists (or should we say Apollo-gists?), for the Roman Solar-Mass now called a "Christ" mass, Saint Nicholas and his devotees, ARE IN FACT MENTIONED in the New Testament.  In the sections below, the claims by Christmas propagandists there is no connection will be shown to be an almost humorous denial (that has been invoked since the iconoclast wars of 847 A.D.) The "Doctrine" of the Nicholaitans is the syncretisitic "mixture" of ancient Rome's licentious imperial (secret society) or "mystery" religion with New Testament faith.  This "Doctrine" is still with us, teaching the same things today it originally taught, and bearing the name of it's original founder, "Saint Nicholas", i.e., Patron Saint and "father of the Roman Solar-Mass to Apollyon, now called a "Christ" mass. The founder of the winter solstice ritual, who first "mixed" the Roman Saturnalia (along with several other pagan Roman holy days) with "Christ", did so in a anti-semitic rejection of New Testament orthodoxy, and an apostate embrace of Rome's Empire gods and their customs of worship.(One of which was, and still is, ritual devil worship conducted on the solstice). Another linked directly to "Saint Nicholas" and his followers, the "Nicholaitans", whose "love for children" was much more "literal" than most wish to imagine. The Roman practice of pedophilia was inherited in the Roman customs of the "season" from Nero's Juvenalia of which, the historic Nicolaitans (the Gentile syncretist movement which eventually became institutionalized in Rome and enforced throughout the empire) naturally incorporated, and remains to this day, naturally predisposed, 1700 years later.

The claim that not much is known about the "Nicolatains", and that they "dissappeared" is patently contradicted both by history and what is the observable predictable trend as early the latter half of the New Testament.  Even with a minimalist admission, the texts mentioned in Revelation concerning this movement, provide several undeniable facts deduced from the Biblical references themselves.  These facts point to a clear unmistakable definition, of something that is admittedly and inexplicably still with us to this very day, still practiced in the name of "Nicholas", who was no "saint" and was in fact, it's founder.


The above quote was credited to one of Rome's own Franciscan Friars, Father William of Ockham (de Okham).  It has become quite famous in the world these days, and is known as "Occam's Razor".  It has become a guiding "heuristic principle" in even modern science. Ironically, what it states is rather mundane common sense, but when said in Latin and given the seal of the Vatican, then it's ...well you know.  It states in English the following: "Entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity, plurality should not be posited without necessity".  Summarized, it is stated as " the simplest explanation is more likely the correct one.  Ironically, despite coming from Rome itself, this advice is never followed when it comes to hermeneutics (the "science" of Biblical or Literary interpretation), if it's fair to call it that.  When it comes to Biblical texts, Apollo-gists of the Roman Solar-mass, do precisely opposite of "Occam's Razor".  They MULTIPLY ENTITIES beyond necessity, in order to keep them COMPLEX, and DISCONNECTED.  And if you for any reason reject the facade of sophistication they appeal to (absent any real content usually), they go into acting mode.  They act like you are stupid, misled, ignorant, simply do not understand, or that they know something that you don't but refuse to tell you. (Because of course, they can't)  There is nothing to be told.  So the acting begins.

It is really very simple, and so is the explanation, as simple as it is fully appearant. "Saint Nicholas" is the "father" of the Roman solar-ritual now called a "Christ" mass. He is it's patron "Saint", and the "father" of this movement.  If you do not either believe or know anything past this, then there is more than enough to deduce the connection to the Biblical Nicolaitan movement, and todays solar-mass to Apollyon called a "Christ" mass.  Even if you knew nothing or believed nothing from the history of the matter which will be discussed in detail below.  Why is this? Because the key elements from the text which are used to DEFINE what a Nicolaitan actually is, are that easy to spot.


Rev 2:15  So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. 

Rev 2:6  But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. 

It may not look like much, but there is a lot more here than most "Christians" realize, and a whole lot more than the Solar-mass Apollo-gist wants to admit. 

1.  The follow and Patronize a "Saint" named Nicolas
2.  They claimed to be "followers of Christ", i.e., "Christians".
3.  They also claimed to be "the real Christians", and those "against them" the "false ones" (as there is admittedly a division here)
4.  They are from/in Ephesus [Rev 2:1  Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write;]
5.  And Pergamos [Rev 2:12  And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write;] (They are present on the coast of western "Turkey")
6.  They knowingly lie about being the "Successors" of the "Apostles" [Rev 2:2  ...and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars: ]
7.  There are called "intentional liars" in more than one place, so it is appearant they practiced a "doctrine" of Utilitarian deceit [Rev 2:2  ...and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars: ]
8.   The Ephesians were told they would have to "overcome them" in order to "eat" from the "Tree of Life" 
[Rev 2:7  He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.]
9.   The "Tree of Life"is also a reference to it's antithesis in Genesis 3 - The "Tree of knowledge of good and evil", (There is the subject of the "Tree" cited)
10. The "serpent", the Egyptian serpent of enlightenment, and it's serpent god "Ra" (the sun). [Identifying this "tree" with Egyptian "sun worship"]
11. They rejected the authority of "scripture" or the "voice of God" [Rev 2:16  Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.]
12.  The "real Christ" is said to hate their doctrine and their "deeds", so too obviously they hated the "doctrine" and the "deeds" of the "real Christ", as demonstrated by the antithesis.
13.  They were accused of "synthesizing" Roman paganism with "Christ" (and in particular it's "holi-days") December 25th to be exact.
14.  And they also synthesized Rome's practice of pedophilia.

Now what you read above, is the "minimalist" version of who the "Nicolaitans" were.  It is the bare minimum.  The very least. The shaving of the Biblical texts down to what it says to even the most skeptical audience.  These are the facts that anyone who accepts the record of the New Testament "must admit" too.  There are 14 rather important facts.  Now let's pretend as though that is all we are allowed to know and nothing, absolutely nothing else other than what is connected to these 14 facts.  What do you see?

1. Their Patron Saint is "Nicolas"
2. They claim to be "following Christ", but ignore what his "real apostles" wrote.
3. They claim to be "the real" Christians, but are actually the replacement of them.
4. Are as ancient as the New Testament (But are not the people OF the New Testament)
5. Their first stronghold mentioned historically is in Ephesus (council of Ephesus)
6. And Pergamos (Western coast of Turkey)
7. They claim to be "successors" of the Apostles (but knowingly lie about it)
8. They openly practice utilitarian deceit as a "doctrine"
9. They promote the (Ge.3) "Tree of knowledge" as the "Tree of life"  (through a deception)
10. You have to "overcome them" to eat from the real "Tree of Life"
11. They reject the authority of Scripture, or God's spirit, for that of a religious leader which is venerated and worshiped.
12. They hate the doctrine of the real (i.e., historical or Jewish) Christ
13. They observe the Roman solar-mass to Apollyon on December 25th.
14. They engage in pedophila.

An educated Protestant, familiar with the clash between Reformers and the Vatican, and the historical criticisms against Rome by them [who were all originally Catholic clergy themselves], will not need much of an explanation beyond this list to recognize what it is describing. A few key descriptors completely aside from the term "Nicolaitan" and the reference to a "Saint" Nicholas, are all but one needs to recognize all the other items that "match" in this "minimalist" list.  Now of course, Rome says "we are not Nicolaitans, they are somebody else, they all disappeared", but .... whether or not they all "disappeared" or not, would have to come from the description given in this same "minimalist" list they wish to restrict the entire discussion. (Which is admittedly, from the canonical record itself, what the actual "definition" of what a "Nicolaitan" actually is) Not declarations from someone who actually matches the list, claiming he "doesn't exist" anymore.

This profile match however, is far from just accidental. Nor is it the poetic license of Protestant interpretive scriptural symbolism in just a "spiritual sense". It is actually and precisely as it actually appears to be. And there is more than enough historical documentation, to explain this simple and obvious connection, to the descriptor list of what a Nicolaitan actually is, you just reviewed from the texts of the New Testament.  In fact, if you go beyond the minimal list provided by Nicolaitans themselves, and actually connect this list with other he descriptors given in the surrounding texts, a fairly clear picture of what has happened historically will begin to emerge.  And it is precisely opposite of what they (the Nicolaitans) have told the world.


1. Their Patron Saint is "Nicolas"   .................................................................................... X   - Admittedly, "Saint Nicholas" (Father Christmas) Patron Saint of Christmas
2. They claim to be "following Christ", but ignore what his "real apostles" wrote.....................X   -  Admittedly, Papal Authority over Scripture
3. They claim to be "the real" Christians, but are actually the replacement of them..................X   -  Admittedly, Rome claims to be "Christian" but "replaces" what is found in Scripture with it's own "Traditions"
4. Are as ancient as the New Testament (But are not the people OF the New Testament)........X   -  Admittedly, Rome claims "it's tradition" goes back to New Testament times (but is not NT)
5. Their first stronghold historically is in Ephesus..................................................................X   - Admittedly, Rome's earliest councils were in fact IN EPHESUS
6. And Pergamos (Western coast of Turkey)........................................................................X   - Admittedly, And Western Turkey (Not Jerusalem, oddly enough)
7. They claim to be "successors" of the Apostles (but knowingly lie about it)...........................X   - Admittedly, claims to be "Successors of the Apostles" (and embraces Utilitarian deceit as a "doctrine")
8. They openly practice utilitarian deceit as a "doctrine".........................................................X   - Admittedly claims both "Saint Chrysostom", and "Ignatius Loyola" doctrines as Church teaching
9. They promote the (Ge.3) "Tree of knowledge" as the "Tree of life"  (through a deception)...X   -  Admittedly,"Christ-mass Tree" originally was the "Adam & Eve" Tree with "Apples"
10. You have to "overcome them" to eat from the real "Tree of Life".....................................X   -  Admittedly, consider Papal decress over the "word of God" (which it historically suppressed)
11. They reject the authority of Scripture, or God's spirit, for that of a religious leader.............X   -  Admittedly, Rome's history of Anti-semitism (including the extermination of Christ's own family) is Record breaking
12. They hate the doctrine of the real (i.e., historical or Jewish) Christ....................................X   -  Admittedly, The "Literal Christ" is replaced with an "Icon Christ" which bears no resemblance.
13. They institutionalized Rome's solar-mass to Apollyon as a "Christ" mass...........................X   -  Admittedly done to coincide with the Roman celebration
14. They are still plagued by a "secret culture" of "pedophilia"  nearly 2000 years later............X    -  Admittedly the Pope claims was not "always seen as wrong" in the Roman Church. 
                                                                                                                                                      (Despite it's open condemnation in the Scriptures by the real Apostles)                       



Contrary To What You've Been Told

In the last book of the New Testament (dated by some as early as 70-95 AD) , the "Christmas" movement is actually mentioned by name.  Though, like the "Yalda" Evergreen Tree practice, part of the Solstice observance for thousands of years before Christianity, condemned by Jeremiah, the polemicists of the Nicholaitan doctrine work very hard at creating plausible denials.  These DENIALS  are transparent in that the identity of the "Nicholaitans" is fairly easy to establish from the text and some very simple historical reconstruction.  The fact we actually still have followers of "Saint Nicholas" and his Saturnalia feast in Christ's name, is all the more illustrative.  The facts known from history which establish this rather undeniable link are discussed in detail below.

In the New Testament, the "Nicholaitans" are identified by their patron "Saint", "Saint Nicholas" whom, they are said to follow and teach a particular "doctrine" that the risen Christ actually says he "Hates" (hate is obviously as strong a term you can actually use).  But if one understands the real nature of the "Doctrine of the Nicholaitans", one could easily see why the risen Christ would have been said to have "hated" it.  Most Jews, or even monotheists for that matter, or anyone with any sentimental connection to the scriptures, would have hated it as well, completely aside from having ever heard of Christ.  Just in terms of pure psychology, mixing the subconscious polar archetypes of survival and suicide, benevolence and personal evil, the demonic and the divine, could explain a lot of irrational subconscious self-destructive behavior in minors.  Parents will often be heard saying to their children "why are you acting this way, we didn't raise you like that?".  Well, sometimes they did, and just didn't realize it.

The "Doctrine" of the "Nicholaitans" consisted of "mixing" the normative concepts of the worship of God as reflected in the New Testament community and ideology, with the worship of the head of the pagan pantheon, the sun-god, particularly in the observance of the pagan Roman festivals, such as the Saturnalia festival.  Since in the New Testament, this deity is the Hebrew "Ha Satawn", referred to as well in the teaching of the Prophets from the Septuagint, the "Doctrine of the Nicholaitans" is actually a teaching which mixes the worship of God and Satan together, equating  both as the same.  Thus why the first Roman Pope directly after Augustine (who pointed Caesar to this teaching at Nag Hammadi), was named literally 666.  When this page was first composed, it was assumed the ancient practice of taking a papal name accounted for the embarrassing behavior.  After all, if Rome's Papal electors had no control over the man's name after he became Pope, they would certainly be exhonorated from any personal or collective responsibility for the strange behavior.  Unfortunately, according to Rome's own claims, they elected him Pope AS Sixtus III (Literally 666), with no name change.  So in other words, in wasn't an accident. They were not "tricked".  They fully participated in this choice, and elected Pope with the name of 3 sixes, fully knowing the prophecy, and fully knowing his name.  This Pope bearing the known name of the Antichrist,  established the worship of the Roman Solar-deity as "Christ" on December 25th at the Lupercale (Wolf-Shrine), along with the creation of "Christian idols", merging the definitions of God and Satan together into one.  As strange as this sounds today, they were attempting to become both "Christ" and the "Antichrist" at the same time, as a form a gnostic occultism which can be traced directly to Saint Pachomos monastery, and Rome's consultation of these ascetic heretic gnostics as "prophets of God". 

Nicholaitan clergy, either refuse to acknowledge the significance of this action by the Roman Papacy because they are dishonest, or they are simply ignorant  due to poor theological education or perhaps they have deceived themselves .  But to any neutral objective observer, the spectacle of having a world religious leader (much less a government enforced head of all Christendom), intentionally bear the name of the Antichrist (and be chosen as such), could simply not be missed?  Even today, if the Roman Pontiff named himself SIX III, who could possibly think sincere "believers" (of any sort) would be expected to simply shrug their shoulders and pretend not to see anything strange?  It would be the equivalent of the Chief Rabbi changing his name "Hitler" and "celebrating" the Holocaust? And this is suppose to "mean nothing"?  If nothing else, at the very least, it reveals the spiritual philosophy of the founders of this Roman solar-mass as a "Christ" mass.

THE HISTORICAL FACTS:  Eusebius attempts to rewrite history to cover something on behalf of Rome, and in so doing exposes the very thing he is attempting to hide; Nicolaitanism.  Eusebuis who lives long after Irenaeus by a century or more, recites Irenaeus, Rome's own source material, and attempts to create a definition of "The Nicolaitans" that is precisely the OPPOSITE of what is recorded in Rome's own material from their own "Latin Fathers".  This "flip of the script" was motivated by an attempt to distance an action in Eusebius day, from an association that was obviously being made to "The Nicolaitans".  Otherwise there would have been no need for the revisionism.  Since Eusebius lived long after Irenaeus who was much closer in time to what had happened, Eusebius had even less authentic information about the events in question than even Irenaeus, yet that does not stop Eusebius in his incredulous attempts at creating a cover story.  These facts are discussed in detail below, demonstrating, as with any lie, the very "cover story" Eusebius is attempting to create, in fact, exposes what he is attempting to hide.  His explanations are also contradicted by the plain record of the New Testament itself.  Eusebius was in fact, a Nicolaitan, thus the need to redefine the history of who they were.




Earliest accounts of this alleged saint are written in 847 AD [500 years after supposed his life] by St. Methodius, Roman Patriarch of Constantinople [Istanbul, Turkey], and admittedly in  his own account he explains his stories are unknown; "Up to the present the life of this distinguished Sheppard has been unknown to the majority of the faithful".  Probably because his accounts were fictional.


There was in fact, someone named Nicholas who did live in this region of Turkey.  This person likewise played a very prominent role in early Christianity and had a very large personal following who considered him their patron saint.  Later in this area in Turkey, churches were built in his honor, images were made of him and prayed to, and miraculous powers were attributed to his images.


What happened to this Nicholas? …And why did he disappear from the pages of history and centuries later get replaced with another fictional Nicholas?


At the time of the Roman councils sponsored by Constantine to consolidate his empire under the rule of Rome’s appointed bishops, there was a very controversial split among the bishops in this area of Asia Minor [Anatolia].


In order to bring the two warring factions together, a compromise had to be reached which satisfied both parties.  One group of bishops boasted ownership of an apostolic writing.  The other group of bishops boasted the popular following of an authentic early saint.


The problem? The book condemned the saint!



Solution: Canonize both.



So finally after several centuries, both the Saint and the book which condemned him were canonized. Saint Nicholas and the Book of Revelation. Thus the need for the fictional account offered in 847 AD. by the Patriarch of Constantinople.  The followers of the Patron Saint Nicholas... were originally called Nicholaitans.


Rev 2:6  But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.


Rev 2:14  But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication.

Rev 2:15  So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.

Rev 2:16  Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.




The Vatican and Greek Orthodox religious leaders deny the connection preferring to promote the known fictional account written in 847 AD.  


ROME has had a long and glorious history of fabricating "stories" for its "Saints".  Modern history has exposed the undeniable fact that ROME has without the slightest conscience indulged, even sponsored, the composition of pure fiction, which it then "passes off" as real "history". Then it has indulged the practice of making authoritarian "demands" on every level of academia [including and especially Encyclopedias] that these "fictions" be accepted as "fact" when all historical evidence exposes them to be bold-faced deceptions.  Aside from making pathological lying a religious "doctrine", under the sanctimonious excuse of "pious lying", Rome not only points it's own finger at men who taught the NICOLAITAN DOCTRINE of deceit, as exemplified in "Saint" Chrysostom.  And not only was the NICOLAITAN DOCTRINE of utilitarian deceit OPENLY REFERENCED in the NEW TESTAMENT as part of the SPECIFIC INVENTORY of their DOCTRINE, it is specifically referenced by ROME in it's literature of men it calls it's own "Church Fathers".  Denials, using contortions and obfuscation of history, as to these links are reduced to humor, when all one has to do is take a good look at the WINK of it's PATRON SAINT MASCOT (Santa-Clause) during it's FAVORITE TIME OF THE YEAR and High Holy Day, the ROMAN SOLAR MASS, now called a "Christ" Mass.  And simply remember the DECEIT parents are encouraged to engage in with their Children during this time, as they also "teach them about Christ".  A lie, a "make-believe" lie, with a wink, wink.  Deception is CLEARLY part of the "inclusionary" practice of both Devil-worship and the worship of God, on Rome's SOLAR MASS, now called a "Christ" Mass.  It's ALL still there, from it's earliest days as New Testament NICOLAITANS, right up to modern day "so-called Christians" who openly encourage, and still practice mixing deceit, and the worship of devils, and idolatry,  with their "Christ" religion without even the prick or peep from a normal healthy conscience.


Below are just a few notorious examples of how this openly indulged deceit and "myth-making" has been practiced by NICOLAITAN and Roman Christianity, and with violence, force and even murder, and militantly having been called "history":



Saint Nicholas (Greek: Ἅγιος Νικόλαος, Hagios Nikólaos ["Saint", literally "Holy", Latin: Sanctus] Nicolaus ["victory of the people"]) (270 – 6 December 343),[3][4] also called Nikolaos of Myra, was a historic 4th-century saint and Greek[5] Bishop of Myra (Demre, part of modern-day Turkey) in Lycia. Because of the many miracles attributed to his intercession, he is also known as Nikolaos the Wonderworker (Νικόλαος ὁ Θαυματουργός, Nikolaos ho Thaumaturgos). He had a reputation for secret gift-giving, such as putting coins in the shoes of those who left them out for him, and thus became the model for Santa Claus, whose modern name comes from the Dutch Sinterklaas, itself from a series of elisions and corruptions of the transliteration of "Saint Nikolaos". His reputation evolved among the faithful, as was common for early Christian saints.[6] In 1087, part of the relics (about half of the bones) were furtively translated to Bari, in southeastern Italy; for this reason, he is also known as Nikolaos of Bari. The remaining bones were taken to Venice in 1100. His feast day is 6 December [O.S. 19 December].  The historical Saint Nicholas is commemorated and revered among Anglican[7], Catholic, Lutheran, and Orthodox Christians. In addition, some Baptist,[8] Methodist,[9] Presbyterian,[10] and Reformed churches have been named in honor of Saint Nicholas.[11] Saint Nicholas is the patron saint of sailors, merchants, archers, thieves, children, pawnbrokers and students in various countries in the Balkans, Central Europe (Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, and Hungary), and Eastern Europe (Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Georgia, Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania, Russia, Serbia), as well as in parts of Western Europe (Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Greece, and Portugal). He is also the patron saint of Aberdeen, Amsterdam, Barranquilla, Bari, Burgas, Beit Jala, Fribourg, Huguenots, Kozani, Liverpool, Paternopoli, Sassari, Siggiewi, and Lorraine. He was also a patron of the Varangian Guard of the Byzantine emperors, who protected his relics in Bari.- SAINT NICHOLAS, Wikipedia

The "legends" which are now  patched together and focused for the tourism industry, on the cities of Demre and Myra in modern day Turkey, are about as accurate to "Saint Nicholas", as the Via Dolorosa in modern day Jerusalem, as actual "path of Christ".  The actual original city of Jerusalem (including it's actual path) having been pulverized into rubble, and buried hopelessly several feet below, the "make-believe" route sold to tourists.

The untold part of the "Saint Nicholas" tradition comes from the problem of historical continuity.  The 4th century "pick" of "Saint Nicholas is a completely arbitrary starting point to pick up the cult's tradition, which actually preceded the 4th century, not just by a few decades, by centuries themselves.  Because Nicholas was worshiped as a god, and prayed to (thus setting the precedent for the doctrines of the Roman papacy), once Nicholas died, he was replaced by another "Saint Nicholas" to serve in his place, much the same way the "Pope" is replaced on death by another "Pope", thus the "Pope" never dies.  While "Popes" continue the title of "Pope", yet maintain their own real identity, the "Saint Nicholas" cult, replaced "Saint Nicholas" with another "Saint Nicholas", who actually took his name as well.  Thus why there was a proliferation of "Saint Nicholas's", and the practice of "Dressing up like Saint Nicholas" and giving presents to children "as him" became a widespread custom.  This is also why "Saint Nicholas" is attributed with "god-like" powers of "omni-presence" (being in many different places at the same time), and "watching" to see whose "naughty or nice".

Understanding the intentionally hidden primal early stages of the "Saint Nicholas cult" and it's relation to to the growth and eventual dominance of "Nicolaitanism" as the imperial religion of the Roman empire, explains the "missing link" between what is observed in the Scriptural record of Christ's original disciples and apostles, and what eventually arose in Vatican, Rome, in place of them, eventually taking the name "Roman Universalism" (i.e., a/k/a the from Latin, "Roman Catholicism").  And thus why also the actual history of this "missing link", remains buried in libraries, and under tons of intentional disinformation concerning it.  But modern archaeology itself has provided clues to this "transitional form" of primitive "Nicolaitanism", to the final "religion" of the empire.

AMMAN, June 22, 2004 (Xinhuanet) -- The earliest known Christian church in Jordan was discovered, if the preliminary dating of the remains as first to second century A.D. proves correct, the local newspaper Jordan Times reported Tuesday.  Director of Jordanian Department of Antiquities, Adnan Hadidi, told the newspaper that the church was found during the third season of excavations at Artemis Temple and its vicinity in Jerash, about 50 km south of Amman.   The excavations have been carried out by the department in cooperation with the Italian Archaeological Center of Oriental Research in Turin within a bilateral agreement between Italy and Jordan to carry out photogrammatic surveys, the report said. - Oldest Christian Church,

Currently claimed to be the oldest known Church ever discovered in the world, has been located in Jerash, Jordan.  What most people who are passing around the Myra version of "Saint Nicholas" are either unaware of, or intentionally ignoring, is that just down the road from this site (literally within walking distance), which is considered to be the oldest known "Church" ever discovered on earth, is a "Saint Nicholas" cult center which existed in the time of the creation of this "earliest Church ever discovered". A time period which predates Saint Nicholas in Myra by centuries.

An inscription in the floor of the church above refers to the "70 beloved by God and the divine" whom the archaeologist believes were refugees from religious persecution in Jerusalem. - Dr Al-Hassan, - Jordan Cave May Be Oldest Church, BBC, June 10, 2008

One of the "activities" that is attributed to "Saint Nicholas" is that he converted pagan temples of Artemis, into "Churches".  The "Church" in Jordan was built by converting a Temple of Artemis into a "Church".  It also displays the now familiar syncretized "Sun-worship" iconography, which is found in both the Roman and eastern Orthodox Churches of today.  While the "Saint Nicholas" cult obviously did exist on the western coast of Turkey, where it both came into contact with New Testament apostles, "Saint Nicolas" of Myra (also on the west coast of Turkey in this very area) was neither the original nor the first "Saint Nicholas" but he was a part of the "Saint Nicolas Cult", whose name he bore as one of it's successors, and whose activities he repeated in the stead of the original "Saint Nicholas", receiving worship and prayer, giving out gifts to "children", celebrating Rome's sun-worshp on the Saturnalia as a "Christ" mass, and secretly practicing Nicolaitan pedophila.

The significance that these syncretistic "Churches" are being found as "Caves", is another very important deviation from the New Testament record.  In the New Testament, the faith was practiced in "The Homes" of believers in accordance to the instructions found in the Torah concerning both Passover and Sabbath.  However, in contrast to this practice, Mithraic practices (sun worship), such as those assimilated in Rome and combined with Sol Invictus/Apollo (and found condemned in the Bible Re.9:11), are almost exclusively found "IN CAVES", because in Mithraism, Mithras was born "in a cave"... and he was born ON DECEMBER 25TH. SEE the video: THE CHURCH OF THE NATIVITY - BETHLEHEM

The fact that "SAINT NICHOLAS" is directly referenced in the very architecture of the "Artemis/Church" in an inscription in the floor mosiac, points directly to the ORIGINAL "SAINT NICHOLAS"


 JACOB, brother of the Lord, first bishop of Jerusalem, who was ordained by the Lord Himself, whose head was crushed by a whiffletree and he died.

CLEOPAS was the second bishop of Jerusalem like Simeon, brother of the Lord; he saw the Lord after the resurrection, and died crucified by Emperor Dometian.

THADDEUS who carried the letter to Avgar in Edessa: he cured the latter of his illness.

ANANIAS, who baptized the holy Apostle Paul, was bishop of Damascus.

STEPHEN, the first martyr, died after being stoned by the Jews.

PHILIP, one of the seven [deacons], who baptized Simon the sorcerer and Canalace’s eunuch, was bishop of Asian Tralia.

PROCHORUS, also one of the seven, was bishop of Bithynian Nicomedia.

NICANOR, one of the seven, died on the same day as Saint Stephen , together with two thousand believers in Christ.

TIMON, one of the seven, was bishop of the island of Arabia, and died after being burned by the Hellenes.

PARMENAS, also one of the seven, died in front of the apostles’ eyes while he was serving.

NICOLAS, also one of the seven, was bishop of Samaria; but he deviated from the true faith together with Simon.<==== "SAINT NICHOLAS" [ONE OF THE SEVENTY]

BARNABAS, who served the Word together with Paul, and preached Christ in peace, was bishop of Milan.

MARK the Evangelist was ordained bishop of Alexandria by the Apostle Peter.

SILAS who preached the Gospel together with Paul, was bishop of Corinth.

LUKE, who preached the Gospel all over the world together with Paul.

SILVANUS, who preached the Gospel together with bishop of Salonika.

CRISPUS, whom the apostle (Paul) mentions in his epistle to Timothy, was bishop of Galilean Chalcedon.

EPENETUS, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle Romans, was bishop of Carthage.

ANDRONICUS, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Pannonia.

AMPLIAS, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans. was bishop of Odissa.

URBAN, whom the apostle mentions in the epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Macedonia.

STACHYS, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans; when Andrew the apostle, traversing the sea of Hellespont, reached Agricopolis, he ordained Stachys as bishop of Byzantium.

APELLES, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Heraklion.

PHYGELLUS was bishop of Ephesus; later he converted to Simon’s teaching.

HERMOGENES was bishop of Thracian Megara.

DEMAS, whom the apostle mentions in his second epistle to Timothy, opposed the teaching of God.

ARISTOBULUS, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Britannia.

NARCISSUS, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Athens.

HERODION, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Patfas.

AGABUS, who is mentioned in the acts of the apostles, who received the gift of prophecy.

RUFUS, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Thebes.

ASYNCRITUS, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Hyrcania.

PHLEGON, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Colossians, was bishop of Marathon.

HERMAS, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Dalmatia.

PATROBAS, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Pottole.

HERMES, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Philipopolis.

LINUS, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Rome after the holy apostle Peter.

GAIUS, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Ephesus after the apostle Timotheus.

PHILOGOGUS, whom the apostle [Paul] mentions, was ordained bishop of Sinope by Andrew the apostle.

RODION, whom the apostle mentions, was beheaded by Nero in Rome, together with the holy apostle Peter.

LUCIUS, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Syrian Laodicea.

JASON, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Tarsis.

SOSIPATER, whom the apostle mentions in his epistle to the Romans, was bishop of Iconium.

TERTIUS, who wrote the epistle to the Romans, was the second bishop of Iconium.

ERASTUS, whom the apostle mentions, was chamberlain of the church in Jerusalem; later he was bishop of Paneas.

APOLLOS, whom the apostle mentions to the Corinthians, was bishop of Caesarea.

CEPHAS was bishop of Iconium.

SOSTHENES, whom the apostle mentions, was bishop of Colophon.

TYCHICUS, whom the apostle mentions, was also bishop of Colophon.

EPAPHRAS, whom the apostle mentions, was bishop of Andriaca.

CAESAR, whom the apostle mentions, was bishop in Dyrrhachium.

MARK, the nephew of Barnabas, whom the apostle mentions, was bishop of Apollonias.

JESUS, called Justus, whom the apostle mentions in the Acts, was bishop of Eleutheropolis.

ARTEMUS, whom the apostle mentions, was bishop of Lystra.

CLEMENT, whom the apostle mentions, saying: “and with Clement, and with my other fellowworkers,” was bishop of Sardice.

ONESIPHORUS, whom the apostle mentions, was bishop of Cyrene.

TYCHICUS, whom the apostle mentions, was the first bishop of Bithynian Chalcedon.

QUARTUS, whom the apostle mentions, was bishop of Berytus.

CARPUS, whom the apostle mentions, was bishop of Thracian Berrhoe.

EUODIUS was bishop of Antioch after Saint Peter.

ARISTARCHUS, whom the apostle mentions, was bishop of Syrian Apamea.

MARK, called John, who is mentioned by Luke in the Acts, was bishop of Byblos.

ZENAS the lawyer, whom the apostle mentions, was bishop of Giospolis.

PHILEMON, to whom the apostle Paul wrote an epistle, was bishop of Gaza. 



TROPHIMUS: these three suffered together with the apostle Paul through all his persecutions; in the end they were beheaded in Rome by Emperor Nero. 

ONESIMUS died in Potiole at the hands of the Roman ruler Tertillus. 

- Who Were The Seventy, Greek Orthodox Church


When modern science "retraces" a "family tree" today, it can do so with "genetic science" now, instead of "family traditions, legends and myths".  The result is often astounding. Tracing gene markers and their unique combinations back millenia into the past yields often surprising histories, not only not told among families, but often in the past hidden along the way.  While the science is today still emerging, the logistical mechanism behind the science is a fairly simple idea.  The origin of "gene groups" can be traced to primary geographical locations.  So in other words, if you find someone in Alaska with a "gene marker" from "Greece", it doesn't matter what they look like, or what their "family tradition is", the objective presence of the "gene marker" reveals the truth about what has happened, without any written history in between explaining the origin.

This concept is also used "spiritually" in the Scriptures. And while it is clearly a "spiritual truth" (admitted by anyone to who believes in and accepts the testimony of Scripture), it may also be actually presented as an historical one as well.  Logic suggests if you have been "progressing" down line, and you observe you are now at "Z", and previously you were at ""X" and "Y", then you are looking at the end of an "Alphabet" that began at "A". As you saw above, the "genetic markers" of "Nicolaitanism" are in fact today, fully present, even down to the details of the Saturnalia, the Pedophila and even most revealing of all, the veneration of it's "patron Saint" "Nicholas" (as "father Christmas").  The key "genetic markers" are all present.

Mat_12:34  O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. 

GENERATION: γέννημα, pron. ghen'-nay-mah, offspring; by analogy produce (literally or figuratively): - fruit, generation.

γέννημα [gennēma] is the ACTUAL ORIGIN of our word "Genetics".  GENETIC (Adj.) "pertaining to origins," coined 1831 by Carlyle from Gk. genetikos "genitive," from genesis "origin" (see genus). Biological sense first recorded in Darwin, 1859. Related: Genetically. Genetical is attested from 1650s. - GENETIC,  ETYMOLOGY ONLINE DICTIONARY  


1. Their Patron Saint is "Nicolas"   ...................................................................................... X   - Admittedly, "Saint Nicholas" (Father Christmas) Patron Saint of Christmas
2. They claim to be "following Christ", but ignore what his "real apostles" wrote.....................X   -  Admittedly, Papal Authority over Scripture
3. They claim to be "the real" Christians, but are actually the replacement of them..................X   -  Admittedly, Rome claims to be "Christian" but "replaces" what is found in Scripture with it's own "Traditions"
4. Are as ancient as the New Testament (But are not the people OF the New Testament)......X   -  Admittedly, Rome claims "it's tradition" goes back to New Testament times (but is not NT)
5. Their first stronghold historically is in Ephesus...................................................................X    - Admittedly, Rome's earliest councils were in fact IN EPHESUS
6. And Pergamos (Western coast of Turkey)........................................................................X   - Admittedly, And Western Turkey (Not Jerusalem, oddly enough)
7. They claim to be "successors" of the Apostles (but knowingly lie about it)...........................X   - Admittedly, claims to be "Successors of the Apostles" (and embraces Utilitarian deceit as a "doctrine")
8. They openly practice utilitarian deceit as a "doctrine"..........................................................X   - Admittedly claims both "Saint Chrysostom", and "Ignatius Loyola" doctrines as Church teaching
9. They promote the (Ge.3) "Tree of knowledge" as the "Tree of life"  (through a deception)...X   -  Admittedly,"Christ-mass Tree" originally was the "Adam & Eve" Tree with "Apples"
10. You have to "overcome them" to eat from the real "Tree of Life"......................................X   -  Admittedly, consider Papal decress over the "word of God" (which it historically suppressed)
11. They reject the authority of Scripture, or God's spirit, for that of a religious leader.............X   -  Admittedly, Rome's history of Anti-semitism (including the extermination of Christ's own family) is Record breaking
12. They hate the doctrine of the real (i.e., historical or Jewish) Christ....................................X   -  Admittedly, The "Literal Christ" is replaced with an "Icon Christ" which bears no resemblance.
13. They institutionalized Rome's solar-mass to Apollyon as a "Christ" mass...........................X   -  Admittedly done to coincide with the Roman celebration
14. They are still plagued by a "secret culture" of "pedophilia"  nearly 2000 years later............X    -  Admittedly the Pope claims was not "always seen as wrong" in the Roman Church. 


2Jn 1:7  For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.This is a deceiver and an antichrist. 



THIS IS.  Present tense.  The ANTICHRIST was already present, (because there are many) and John identifies specifically who he is talking about.  The liars, who are actually themselves the theological descendants of who "THIS IS" is referring to, are allowed by Protestant Christians to offer every lie known to man, some so patently absurd to be laughable.  Yet no one calls these liars out.  Well here we shall diverge from the general practice,  The ANTICHRIST is unmistakable in the Scripture, and there is is absolutely no reason to mistake it for anyone or anything else, other than the shear desire to do so.

(1) THE ANTICHRIST (Singular) - There is ONE which would become the "head", someday over the rainbow.

(2) THE "SPIRIT" OF THE ANTICHRIST - Is already present and working

(3) THERE ARE MANY ANTICHRIST - The thing that is "at work" already was/is easily and clearly understood from this text despite the intentional obfuscations, generally offered by (THE ANTICHRIST), in defense of it's "SPIRIT".

(4) THIS IS - A specific reference to a specific thing.  Not ambiguous. Not generalized. But SPECIFIC... THIS IS.  This that John is pointing too in the text of this very letter with his own finger. THIS IS.  Not something else, but THIS.  Not anything else, but THIS. THIS IS. If it is not THIS IS, then it is not what the term "THE ANTICHRIST" refers to plain and simple because John, (who coins the term itself) says THIS IS (The Antichrist).  


THIS IS, unkown to the general public, something that is perfectly well known.  THIS IS something which has an unbroken linage throughout history and THIS IS something that "Academic theologians" and "Apollo-gists" know perfectly well what it refers to, and hide and lie about it, to make what THIS IS referring to, mean something, actually anything else, they can manage.  Because THIS IS referring to the very thing "Apollo-gists" defend.  THIS IS referring to the very linage of their theology.  THIS IS referring to the very institution for which they work, and from whom they get their pay checks.  THIS IS not ambigious, and THIS IS not confusing, and THIS IS not some ethereal obscure strange and mysteriously hidden thing.  

THIS IS referring to what these people either admit, or hide.  But THIS IS not a mystery.  THIS IS something John was pointing his finger at in Ephesus, something that was also addressed in another writing attributed to his authorship, the book of Revelation, where THIS IS explained in even greater detail and more specificity, and adds to the volume of information once again, to the same thing the New Testament warns about in scores of passages beginning with it's very first gospel, and mentioned by Christ himself.  THIS IS no mystery.

THIS IS in Ephesus and the DOCTRINE that THIS IS referring to, adding to the already volumous amount of material already given, THIS IS once again pointing out a distinct characteristic about the group of people and their teaching that THIS IS unambiguously referring to.  The "doctrine" that THIS IS referring to is a hallmark of a particular group of ideologues WHO CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN SUCCESSORS OF THE ORIGINAL APOSTLES, AND USED INTENTIONAL LYING TO PROMOTE THEIR RELIGION.  

Rev 2:2  I know your works, and your labor, and your patience, and that you cannot bear (the) evil ones; and you tried those pretending to be APOSTLES and are not, and found them to be LIARS

The central aspect of this doctrine pointed to here, is that YESHUA was not "human".  He was a "symbol" or a "spirit" not to be understood literally and historically. Not a "real person".  

2Jn 1:7  For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. 

This text does not refer to "skeptics"  who simply question whether or not there ever was a YESHUA, and it does not refer to ATHIESTS who do not believe there is a God.  THIS IS referring to a specific group of relgious ideologues who moved among circles of "Christians" (if you prefer to use the term) or New Testament communities spreading their teaching.  They were in and among "Christians".  They adopted the language, the doctrines, the message and the social community of believers, disciples, "christians", New Testament Jewish converts, ... AND they added some very specific extra things.  They changed the message slightly so that it ended up being something exactly opposite of Christ. Anti-... Christ.  THIS IS referring to a group of idealouges who practiced UTILITARIAN DECIET:

Rev 2:2... 

pretending to be APOSTLES and are not, and found them to be LIARS

This does not refer to JEWS or A JEW, who does not "accept Jesus into their heart", because JEWS are said to have been intentionally "blinded" so precisely for the very reason that in the end they WOULD BE SAVED!  

Rom 11:25,26  For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

How can that be? SAVED BY REJECTING "JESUS"?  Because the writers of the New Testament knew THE "JESUS" THEY WOULD BE CALLING "LORD" WOULD NOT BE HIM:

Mat 7:22,23  Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 

And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. 

And JEWS would BE SAVED from this DELUSION.  How do you "get saved" and reject ROME'S CHRIST-MASS CHRIST "JESUS" IDOL? At the same time? By "accepting THE BLOOD and flesh OF CHRIST" even though you are BLIND to the fact you are doing it!  While those under THE DELUSION REJECT IT, THEY REJECT HIS VERY BLOOD AND FLESH! (even though they SAY they "accept Christ")  That is how.

THIS PASSOVER - Luke 22:13,15, Mtt.26:19
THIS DO - Luke 22:19,1 Co.11:24,25 
THIS IS my body - Luke 22:19, Mtt.26:26, 1 Co.11:24,25
THIS IS my blood - Luke 22:20, Mtt.26:28, 1 Co.11:24,25

Catholics are right. It really is THE BLOOD AND FLESH OF CHRIST.  And THEY have REJECTED IT... In "Christ-Mass" (Institued by 666 Literally) and have "accepted" the worship of his Idol, an "Image" who is in REALITY APOLLYON. NOT CHRIST.  And EVERY "CHRISTIAN" Protesant or Catholic who "Embraces" that Idol and worships it, damns themselves by "drinking from the cup of God's wrath", rather than THE SEDER, which is is FLESH AND BLOOD. (now whether you wish to argue that literal or symbolic, is beside the point, because you reject what he told you to do, in favor of ROME'S "CHRIST-MASS", and it's Idol of Apollyon (Which is not Christ and cannot save given to you by Pope SIXTUS III, literally 666). Of which it is more than clear, those who do this will be "damned" to the very "lake of fire" they are worshiping. You will not be able to find a SINGLE "Apollo-gist" for the Antichrist that can explain how REJECTING CHRIST causes you to BE SAVED as a JEW! NOT ONE! They stumble all over themselves trying to explain this blatant violation of their own theological claims.  Here it is. It is explained. And it is found right in front of your own eyes in the very texts of the New Testament itself.

100% of the proposed "Antichrists"  in the world, that are proposed by the people THIS IS actually referring to, are subsitute "Antichrists" to serve in their OWN PLACE.  They volunteer Muslims, Jews, Atheists, Liberals and anyone else they can find to point the finger at and accuse of being "THE ANTICHRIST", none of whom THIS IS referring to specifically, historically and literally right here in this text in EPHESUS.



What is in Ephesus? THIS IS in Ephesus. THE ANTICHRIST.  Would that be Muslim? No. Would that be Atheists? No. Would that be an American Democrat? or a "Liberal" or a Marxist? No, no, no. THIS IS the Antichrist and THIS IS in Ephesus in 100 AD, to whom this letter was written.  THIS IS in their own midsts, moving around among them as "Christians".  THIS IS something John rebuked again in Revelation again IN EPHESUS.  THIS IS known from history to be called "CHRISTIAN" today.  THIS IS something known from history to have been instituted AS ROMAN LAW by a man BY THE NAME OF THREE SIXES.  THIS IS referring to the same thing the "mystery of Satan", the "doctrine of Balaam" and THE NICHOLAITANS all referred to exaclty and precisely IN EPHESUS.  THIS IS is doctrine which DENIES THE FLESH OF CHRIST, that he CAME IN THE FLESH, that he was A REAL PERSON, and not simply an ICON, AN IMAGE, AN IDOL.  THIS IS referring to the same thing that was predicted to BECOME THE MAJORITY, not the "minority". THIS IS referring to the same thing that would be headed by a man who calls himself GOD.  THIS IS THE SAME THING, and THIS IS IN EPHESUS WHEN THIS LETTER WAS WRITTEN.  AND THIS IS THE ANTICHRIST! Nothing else. Absolutely NOTHING else. Because John said THIS IS the Antichrist. AND that there would be both MANY throughout history, and ONE who would be it's absolute head, at the same time. ONE and MANY.  Ruling over the MAJORITY of people who would call Christ "Lord", but in reality, would be worshiping something else entirely, AN "IMAGE" WHICH IS NOT HIM.  Now where would we find something like that? IN EPHESUS!

It was in Ephesus that the First (Original) "Lord's Seder" was being "forsaken" 

Rev 2:4  Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love. 

"Love" and the phrase "thy first love" has been obfuscated intentionally by translators to hide the meaning of the text.  The phrase  is "Thy first Agape'".  The "Agape" meal was the passover Seder that was instituted by Christ in the gospels.  It was instituted by him, because at the time the Jewish rabbis did not practice a domestic passover, and did not do so according to their own sources for another 40-50 years until after the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem.  But followers of the Jewish Christ had already been keeping a domestic passover, as instructed by Moses himself, to be kept in the home, for an "everlasting ordinance" decades BEFORE Jewish Rabbis instituted the practice (that they now claim to be offended over when they hear that a "Christian" keeps it?)  This strange twist of history is once again the work of Rome's finger-twisting on history.


The Bible could simply not be more clear: THIS IS Antichtist (2 John 1:7)  What SPECIFICALLY THIS IS, 
will astound and amaze you.  

"There are also those who heard from him that John, the disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving Cerinthus within, rushed out of the bath-house without bathing, exclaiming, “Let us fly, lest even the bath-house fall down, because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within.” (Irenaeus. Adversus Haeres. Book III, Chapter 3, Verse 4).

According to this text attributed to Irenaeus, "Cerinthus" was a heretic who the Apostle John publicly denounced towards the end of the first century. Notice that Irenaeus wrote that John detested Cerinthus so much that he would not even take a bath in the same building as him.

This is an amazing tid-bit of historical information (true or otherwise) .  Why? Because it is ...



ROME has attempted to pin Cerinthus with the "Ebionites".  Ebionites were a sect that taught Jewish legalism, not hardly the kind of theology that would syncretize it's ideology with Rome's polytheistic sun-god worship.  What is interesting about "interpolations" is that they leave a trail of ROME'S deceit.  So by paying attention to what they were actually inserting into documents, you see (1) what they were trying to lie about, and (2) what changes they were actually trying to "FABRICATE" an historical record for.

In this case, we once again find the finger of ROME in the middle of  a DOCUMENT FRAUD to concoct a phony "history".  
The first mention of "Ebionites" is to be found in some manuscripts of Ignatius' letter to the Philadelphians mentions "Ebionite", but this has been shown to be a later addition (older versions of the letter do not have them):

"if any one says there is one God, and also confesses Christ Jesus, but thinks the Lord to be a mere man, and not the only-begotten God, and Wisdom, and the Word of God, and deems Him to consist merely of a soul and body, such an one is a serpent, that preaches deceit and error for the destruction of men. And such a man is poor in understanding, even as by name he is an Ebionite." - Ignatius' letter to the Philadelphians  

Thus it is "claimed" that Its origin is "obscure" and most scholars date them to the late second century. It was erroneously said by early Christian writers that the sect was founded by a certain Ebion. The early accounts about them were subject to much debate.  The FACT is that what is asserted about CERINTHUS in the CATHOLIC ENYCLOPEDIA is simply another example of ROME"S historical fraud,  ROME's doctored "paper-work" makes opposite contradictory claims about CERINTHUS and EBIONITES, which mutually eliminate each other as possibilities.  Why the "Doctoring" on CERINTHUS?

(1) CERINTHUS was admittedly from EGYPT (Location of the Nag Hammadi library)
(2) CERINTHUS was admittedly a GNOSTIC (The Nag Hammadi library was gnostic)
(3) CERINTHUS was the originator of the "syncretism" with the "sun-god" seen in the Solar-Solstice "Christ-Mass" (Also found in Nag Hammadi documents)
(4) CERINTHUS was admittedly a VEGETARIAN (Nag Hammadi community were gnostic vegetarians)


Ananias of Shirak, circa 600 A.D., wrote:

The Festival of the holy Birth of Christ, on the 12th day before the feast of the Baptism, was not appointed by the holy apostles, nor by their successors either, as is clear from the canons of the holy apostles…which is 6th of January, according to the Romans.  
But many years after their fixing the canons, this festival was invented, as some say, by the disciples of the heretic Cerinthus; and was accepted by the Greeks, because they were truly fond of festivals and most fervent in piety; and by them it was spread and diffused all over the world. 
But in the days of the holy Constantine, in the holy Council of Nice, this festival was not received by the holy fathers (Ananias of Shirak, On Christmas, The Expositor, 5th series vol. 4 (1896) Translation. pp.323-337, as reported by ccel).

his festival was invented, as some say, by the disciples of the heretic Cerinthus


Cerinthus A Gnostic-Ebionite hereticcontemporary with St. JohnCerinthus was an Egyptian, and if not by race a Jew…Cerinthus’s doctrines were a strange mixture of Gnosticism, Judaism, Chiliasm, and Ebionitism (Arendzen J.P. Transcribed by William D. Neville. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume III. Published 1908. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat, November 1, 1908. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

Cerinthus was an Egyptian *NAG HAMMADI LIBRARY, along with Saint Pachomius monastary were in Egypt.  




“John, the disciple of the Lord, preaches this faith (the deity of Christ), and seeks, by the proclamation of the Gospel, to remove that error which by Cerinthus had been disseminated among men, and a long time previously by those termed Nicolaitans, who are an offset of that “knowledge” falsely so called, that he might confound them, and persuade them that there is but one God, who made all things by His Word” (Irenaeus Against Heresies iii 11.  1; ANF vol. 1, p. 426) 





(2 JOHN 2:7)


Whether perhaps by divine providence, or by strange coincidence IT WAS AT ROME'S OWN VERY COUNCIL OF EPHESUS, that Eutychus (Pope Sixtus III's PERSONAL THEOLOGIAN) actually WENT ON RECORD LITERALLY DENYING THE FLESH OF CHRIST.  It created one of the biggest scandals in the History of the Roman Church!  THIS WAS DONE AT EPHESUS!  Sixtus III of course, being the exact person who officiated the first official Christ-Mass at the Vatican.

And it was here at Ephesus that the RISEN CHRIST reminded the converts that HE was the ONE who WALKED IN THE MIDST OF THE MENORAH.  The Menorah being the symbol of Biblical Judaism, in DIRECT CONTRAST to THE NICHOLAITANS!  Obviously push-back on the anti-semitism being advocated in these same communities by the NICHOLAITANS, those who DENIED THE JEWISH FLESH OF CHRIST.  More will be discussed about these facts in the section entitled THE MASS. 

1Jn 4:3  And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; andeven now already is it in the world. 

And it was at the COUNCIL OF EPHESUS that MARY was declared the "Mother of God" at title that has always resonated with blasphemy to Protestants despite all the shady sophistry employed by Rome to twist and turn the obvious to make it sound "Biblical", and endow it with the "air" evangelicalism it obviously does not deserve.

The Antichrist is someone who recieves worship as God.  His name is Six Six Six.  He is head a "Mystery Babylon" who is headquartered in Rome.  They deny the "Flesh" of Christ, his historicity, his Jewishness, all of the above, and they were known in 100 AD by the name of NICHOLAITANS. and taught the "Mystery of Satan". the "Doctrine of Balaam" and the "Doctrine of the Nicolaitans".  If you really think you have to "guess" who this describes, you are being simply dishonest with yourself.  







Bishop of Myra in Lycia; died 6 December, 345 or 352. Though he is one of the most popular saints in the Greek as well as the Latin Church, there is scarcely anything historically certain about him (A) except that he was Bishop of Myra in the fourth century (B).  Some of the main points in his legend are as follows: He was born at Parara, a city of Lycia in Asia Minor; in his youth he made a pilgrimage to Egypt and Palestine; shortly after his return he became Bishop of Myra; cast into prison during the persecution of Diocletian, he was released after the accession of Constantine, and was present at the Council of Nicaea. In 1087 Italian merchants stole his body at Myra, bringing it to Bari in Italy.  The numerous miracles St. Nicholas is said to have wrought, both before and after his death, are outgrowths of a long tradition - CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA

(A) Hardly anything is "known" about him.

(B) Bishop of the 4th century.

  B1. That is the "claim" that was invented about him in 847 CE [520 years later] over half a millenia! It is contradicted by the historical record. 

  B2. SAINT NICOLAS was KNOWN from before the time of Irenaeus!!! His followers were described as compromisingly "indulgent".  This "conflict" was "resolved" by fabrication of a new "tradition" for him, which removed the conflct.

  B3. How do we know the "tradition" was fabricated? 

  B4. Nicholas is not described in any lists of Bishops connected to the council of Nicea. It is a patent lie to cover what WAS known about him. FACT: He was already being "venerated" as a "Saint" with a "following", by the time of the first council of Nicea.  There are however "clues" about who he "really was" in history, in relationship to that "council" however. In the "legend", he is presented as an assistant to and defender of Constantine [the "christian" sun worshipper]. How did he "help Constantine"?  Who instituted the SATURNALIA celebration of SOL INVICTUS, we now call CHRIST-MASS? How else? SAINT NICHOLAS!

  B5.  It is "claimed" by "tradition" that he was present in the Palestinian West Bank town of Beit Jala on pilgrimage to the "Holy Land", where he is still venerated as the town Patron Saint.  This location is one of the oldest cult centers for Saint Nicholas veneration in the world.  While there is no historical evidence that the Turkish fictional character made any "pilgrimages" to the "Holy Land", the oldest known "Church" building in the world has been excavated in this SAME area.

B6. If "Saint Nicholas" is one and the same as the "Patron Saint" of the "Nicolaitans", and this movement was a syncretism with paganism that New Testament Apostolic practice found reprehensible and unacceptable, one would expect to find early indications of this syncretism.  According to "tradition" Saint Nicholas "destroyed" pagan temples to Diana [Artemis].  But from archeology and history we see that these 'temples" were not "destroyed" at all, but "converted" into "churches" [remembering that the term itself has not yet been invented].  As per the example of the Red Basillica in Pergamos, this often entailed changing the sign out front, and swapping out deity cognates, Isis is replaced with Mary, Apollo is replaced with Christ, and business goes on as usual.  This form of "conversion" would have never been embraced by Jewish believers writing in the New Testament, as evidenced by their own comments. [Acts 15:20, Acts 15:29, Acts 21:25, 1 Co.10:28, 2 Co.6:16]

B7. What do we find this oldest "christian temple" to actually be? Surprise! It's a "temple to Artemis". [A syncretization of pagan custom and "christian" iconography] in the exact area "Saint Nicholas" veneration is said to have been active in it's EARLIEST PHASES!

QUOTE: Oldest Christian church possibly discovered in Jordan - Director of Jordanian Department of Antiquities, Adnan Hadidi, told the newspaper that the church was found during the third season of excavations at Artemis Temple and its vicinity in Jerash, about 50 km south of Amman. END QUOTE - Oldest Christian Church Possibly Discovered In Jordan, Peoples Daily Online

NOTE: This location would place this "Artemis Temple/Church" within just miles of the Patron Saint's CITY of Beit Jala!

ON NICOLAITANS - Nicolaites  - (Also called Nicolaitans), a sect mentioned in the Apocalypse (ii,6,15) as existing in Ephesus, Pergamus, and other cities of Asia Minor, about the character and existence of which there is little certainty (1)Irenaeus (Adv. haer., I, xxvi, 3; III, xi, 1) discusses them but adds nothing to the Apocalypse except that "they lead lives of unrestrained indulgence."(2)  Tertullian refers to them, but apparently knows only what is found in St. John (De Praescrip. xxxiii; Adv. Marc., I, xxix; De Pud., xvii).Hippolytus based his narrative on Irenaeus, though he states that thedeacon Nicholas was the author of the heresy and the sect (Philosph., VII, xxvi). Clement of Alexandria (Strom., III, iv) exonerates Nicholas, andattributes the doctrine of promiscuity, which the sect claimed to have derived from him, to a malicious distortion of words harmless in themselves. With the exception of the statement in Eusebius (H. E., III, xxix) that the sect was short-lived (3), none of the references in Epiphanius, Theodoret etc. deserve mention, as they are taken from Irenaeus. The common statement, that the Nicolaites held the antinomian heresy of Corinthhas not been proved. Another opinion, favoured by a number of authors, is that, because of the allegorical character of the Apocalypse, the reference to the Nicolaitans is merely a symbolic manner of reference, based on the identical meaning of the names, to the Bileamites or Balaamites (Revelation 2:14) who are mentioned just before them as professing the same doctrines (4). - CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA

  (1) THERE IS LITTLE CERTAINTY - Except the fact they are certain it has nothing to do with Saint Nicholas?


  (2) UNRESTRAINED INDULGENCE - Are we to then believe at Saturnalia, a group marked by their "indulgence" would suddenly be "moved" by fidelity to abstain from the pagan celebration? though they "freely indulge" in everything else on earth?




This comment is both incorrect and untrue.  In fact, Eusebius is addressing the issue as a polemical.  But why even address it?  If it was "short-lived" and provided no further controversy to his concern?


Eusebius begins his account with a confession of purpose:


"We shall introduce into this history in general only those events which may be useful first to ourselves and afterwards to posterity." (Ecclesiastical History, Vol. 8, chapter 2).




Here is how we discover the ideological posture of Eusebius in his fictionalization of a "history" to support the Roman Papacy. 


* While he cites Irenaeous as a "Church Father" who allegedly by his own claim knew the Apostles in person, Irenaeous fully accepts the book of REVELATION which CONDEMNS the Nicholaitans.  Yet, centuries later when Eusebius is gloriously "fictionalizing" a "history" for its fictional Roman Papacy, he cites Irenaeous as having not only taken the book of REVELATION as real, but have spent a serious effort considering the interpretation of passages from it, including the one mentioning the NAME OF THE ANTICHRIST, which Irenaeous clearly recognizes as future to his own day. 


* Yet when Eusebius is recounting this fact, he refers to the same book not only accepted by this "Church Father", but even intentionally DISMISSES any connection with events in his own day, referring to the book itself as "the So-called" Apocalypse of John!?!


* It is "clear" from Eusebius's own words, Eusebius was on the side of some controversy concerning this book, which placed him on the opposite side of Irenaeous, in relation to it.




Here we observe a major inconsistency in Eusebius's lies.  And we also see a "posture" with Eusebius, that is hostile to the BOOK, that his own alleged "Church Father" not only subscribed to, but studied and took very seriously [as Apostolic] , some of the most difficult texts from!


Eusebius reveals himself:

Chapter XVIII. The Apostle John and the Apocalypse.

1 It is said that in this persecution the apostle and evangelist John, who was still alive, was condemned to dwell on the island of Patmos in consequence of his testimony to the divine word.

2 Irenaeus, in the fifth book of his work Against Heresies, where he discusses the number of the name of Antichrist which is given in the so-called Apocalypse of John, speaks as follows concerning him:

3 "If it were necessary for his name to be proclaimed openly at the present time, it would have been declared by him who saw the revelation. For it was seen not long ago, but almost in our own generation, at the end of the reign of Domitian."

4 To such a degree, indeed, did the teaching of our faith flourish at that time that even those writers who were far from our religion did not hesitate to mention in their histories the persecution and the martyrdoms which took place during it.

5 And they, indeed, accurately indicated the time. For they recorded that in the fifteenth year of Domitian Flavia Domitilla, daughter of a sister of Flavius Clement, who at that time was one of the consuls of Rome, was exiled with many others to the island of Pontia in consequence of testimony borne to Christ.

Notice how Eusebius refers to the BOOK OF REVELATION [Fully embraced by Irenaeus] as "So-called"?!? Quoting a "Church Father" he cites to build his fictional history for Rome?!? [Remember a number of document forgeries have been traced by historians to Eusebius, including the interpolation inserted into Josephus, which he actually then "points to" to bolster his "historical' arguments]




Why is this? Because the TEXT in the BOOK was polarizing, and forced one, to take the side of the linage of those embracing the BOOK, or those embracing the linage of what was CONDEMNED in it! Eusebius [despite his best efforts at masking the truth] of his "real history", exposes himself as INCONSISTENT with the linage of faith, from "apostolic times" that Irenaeus himself was attempting to claim to be a part of.


The "Break" is revealed in his own words. His posture is clearly on the side of that which was condemned by the Book.  And thus his need to deny the BOOK it's actual credibility, undeniably documented from earliest times by Irenaeus.




Another observation even more telling is that he appears to be attempting to demonstrate no connection between the well-known prophecy of a coming "Anti-christ" with his own piece of propagandizing for Rome.  Apparently, it had already surfaced as a suspicion.




Several of ROME'S councils had attempted to officially ban the book and end it's following, including:


* Council of Nicea 325 CE which rejected it, but accepted the Nicholaitans and their Saturnalia practices,


* Council of Laodocea 363 CE rejected it but accepted the Nicholaitans and their Saturnalia practice,


* The APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS 380 CE [a Roman document], rejected it, but accepted the Nicholaitans and their Saturnalia practices


* Saint Gregory The Theologian, late 380s [from the same area in Turkey] rejected the book, but accepted the Nicholaitans and their Saturnalia practices. 


* In 394 Bishop Amphilocus [also from Turkey] rejected the book, but accepted the Nicholaitans and their Saturnalia practices. 


* In fact, while there are several places in official "Church History" where rejection of the BOOK can be found, virtually little or nothing, about the rejection of the Nicholaitans can ever be found past Irenaeus.


BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T "REJECTED" AFTER IRENAEUS!!!  THEY BECAME "MAINSTREAM" [The Majority]. "Saint Nicolas" and compromises with paganism were become the accepted "norm", and especially in cites like ROME.




Eusebius, the notorious Roman Church historian who had a particularly bad habit of flattering revisionism, [going so far as to compose fraudulent documents] claims the "sect" was "short-lived" and nothing else is said about it.


Despite the fact that all of these same Roman ecclesiasticals where at that very moment venerating a Saint Nicholas [from this very same region], and all practicing the VERY PRACTICES first introduced by the Nicholaitans, and would soon be "building Churches" in his honor, with Icons of him to be prayed to!


Eusebius .... WAS a Nicholaitan!








Eusebius was prominent in its transactions. He was not naturally a spiritual leader or theologian, but as a very learned man and a famous author who enjoyed the special favour of the emperor, he came to the fore among the 300 members of the council. The confession which he proposed became the basis of the Nicene Creed. - WIKIPEDIA 1-26-2007




While the Nicholaitans continued growing the cult of Nicholas Veneration within Rome's Church, Rome continued rejecting the Book which condemned them. As late as 1546 CE [Council of Trent] the book was still being rejected, and it was only accepted in a "split-decision" 15 to 24. This book is today, as it has been throughout Roman Church history, considered the "primary villain" in the New Testament canon.


The problem ROME encountered was that the book had gained an equally large number of advocates throughout the world, including one of the most renowned centers of influence where Saint Augustine was bishop [one of the primary architects of Roman theology].  


It had been clearly embraced by the SAME "Church Fathers" they assembled together to quote in order to justify themselves in their departures.  Thus every time a scholar went back to read them, the BOOK would resurface.


The eastern "Church" had rejected the book from it's collection too known as the Peshitta, but embraced Saint Nicholas.  


In fact, this book, which is now considered to be the "word of God" by most Christians throughout the world, was not finally and officially included in the current canon of the New Testament until 1546 CE!


Due in large part to the preference given the Patron Saint Nicholas and his veneration in contradiction to the early apostolic writings which openly condemned him.


There is no instance in recorded Church history, where "Nicholas" was NOT venerated as SAINT NICHOLAS.  What IS novel was the fictional "history" they came up with to EXPLAIN HIMIN 847 CE.


What happened around 847 CE that created the need for a "new history" for this "Saint"?


A period of Church history we rarely ever hear about anymore known as the Iconoclast conflicts. [Worship of images] One of the chief causes of this conflict was ...guess what? The BOOK OF REVELATION


Images of Nicholas came under criticism from anti-Iconoclasts. In order to respond, the "history" in 847 was "introduced" as propaganda to protect Nicholas veneration, which was not only a source of both pride and importance, but raked in both devotees and money to the cult centers in Byzantium, [Modern Turkey].




So... on the one hand you have an ancient uninterrupted veneration of a Saint named Nicholas, including whose images were placed in Churches and prayed to, from earliest times, and then you have a "fictional history" invented for him in 847 CE after the wake of the Iconoclast conflicts, whose anti-Iconoclasts invoked passages from the BOOK OF REVELATION. [Where the Nicholas cult is actually mentioned]  Then you have a "new" previously unknown "history" introduced by the Patriarch of Constantinople [defending his Icons... including those of "Saint Nicholas"].


The pieces to this historical puzzle are rather transparent once you begin to examine the details of these events.


Saint Nicholas Versus the Book Of Revelation, 




If you accept REVELATION as Irenaeus did, you will reject the Nicholaitansincluding their Saint, if you accept the Nicholaitans, their practices and their Saint, you will inevitably have a dubious attitude toward the book which condemns you. Nothing has changed.




(Also called Nicolaitans), a sect mentioned in the Apocalypse (ii,6,15) as existing in Ephesus, Pergamus, and other cities of Asia Minor, about the character and existence of which there is little certainty. Irenaeus (Adv. haer., I, xxvi, 3; III, xi, 1) discusses them but adds nothing to the Apocalypse except that "they lead lives of unrestrained indulgence."  - CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA

Christ-mass Apollo-gists admit they neither know when Saint Nicholas really lived nor what the DOCTRINE of the NICOLAITANS really was.  They are however certain it has nothing to do with the obvious.  The practice of the pagan Saturnalia with gift-giving and the eating of "MEAT OFFERED TO IDOLS" [the Saturnalia Ham]  as promoted by the ambiguous Saint Nicholas.  How would a "tradition" of "unrestrained indulgence", suddenly RESTRAIN ITSELF every year... in order to AVOID participating in SATURNALIA ? ? ?


The explanations avoiding this more than obvious connection are patently absurd.





Rev 2:6  But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

Rev 2:14  But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, (1) who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, (2) to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to (3) commit fornication.



The mention of "Balam" from the Tanakh along with a number of references to "the wages of unrighteousness" make it clear, that whatever the DOCTRINE OF THE NICHOLAITANS consisted of, it clearly embraced the concept of using DECIET to GAIN "treasure", "wealth" or "money".  The UTILITARIAN practice of DECIET for GAIN, is morally an offensive concept, especially when it comes to "the things of God", but among THE NICHOLAITANS, it is employed for practical gain, without conscience.  The modern day followers of "Saint Nicholas", the theological descendents of THE NICHOLAITANS still teach this very concept, and have incorporated as one of the central rituals of their sun-god's "high-holy day", lying to children and giving them "presents" in exchange for their "belief".  The teaching of this perversion begins with them as soon as the child is born, it's very first "Christ-mass" and continues throughout the life of the child into early adolescence.



QUOTE: "On the 18th and 19th, which were general holidays, the day began with an early bath; then followed the family sacrifice of a sucking pig, to which Horace [65 - 8 B.C.E.] alludes in familiar lines:

Cras genium mero
Curabis et porco bimenstri
Cum famulis operum solutis


["2Odes, 3.17. ": "Tomorrow, attended by your household slaves from tasks released, cheer your soul with unmixed wine and a PIG but two months old!" END QUOTE (from: Horace The Odes and Epodes, C.E. Bennett, 1925, 237)].




The lascivious practices of Saturnalia were known to all, [as mentioned by Lucian] and obviously "psuedo-christians" engaging in the celebration, would have naturally indulged these behaviors as well [and are thus reflected in the texts mentioned above as would be expected]. 


FACT: The modern custom of “kissing under the mistletoe” is a later synthesis of the sexual license of Saturnalia with the Druidic sacrificial cult - Clement Miles, Christmas Customs and Traditions: Their History and Significance, New York: Dover Publications, 1976, pp. 273.


The PATRONS of SAINT NICHOLAS's fusion of the PAGAN SATURNALIA with CHRIST, obviously participated in this SEXUAL LICENSE, as part of their compromises with the customs of ROME. [As evidenced by the text  Rev 2:14 ]


These SEXUAL compromises included; Nakedness, Fornication, and Adultery [pretty much like a modern Christmas party] Part of the custom included "role-swapping".  Traditional commentators speculate the Nicholaitans were involved with "wife-swapping", which of course, would have been consistent with "role-swapping" and "sexual license".  But there is an interesting distinctionn in the actual word used here in the Greek, and that word is NOT "Adultery" as ROME"S traditional explanation claims.  It is FORNICATION.  The word is distinctive to UNMARRIED MALES.... or as a figure of speech referring to Idolatry. (More will be noted aobut this distinction below)


Observing other gods in the pracice of Idolatry was referred to as fornication throughout the scriptures.  Even if you wish to assert the term "adultery" into these historical events, though absent in the text, you will be forced to reach a much similiar conclusion (even from Rome's own accounts) concerning what the NICHOLAITANS were practing, and as is often said by Romans, it is especially true here: "All roads lead to Rome".


Jer 3:8  And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery

Jer 3:9  And it came to pass through the lightness of her whoredom, that she defiled the land, and committed adultery

Jer 5:7  How shall I pardon thee for this? thy children have forsaken me, and sworn by them that are no gods:

when I had fed them to the full, they then committed adultery

Eze 16:32  But as a wife that committeth adultery, which taketh strangers instead of her husband!

Eze 23:37  That they have committed adultery, and blood is in their hands, and with their idols have they committed adultery,


"The reasons for celebrating our major feasts when we do are many and varied. In general, however, it is true that many of them have at least an indirect connection with the pre-Christian feasts celebrated about the same time of year — feasts centering around the harvest, the rebirth of the sun at the winter solstice (now Dec. 21, but Dec. 25 in the old Julian calendar), the renewal of nature in spring, and so on." -The New Question Box - Catholic Life for the Nineties, copyright 1988 by John J. Dietzen, M.A., S.T.L., ISBN 0-940518-01-5 (paperback), published by Guildhall Publishers, Peoria Illinois, 61651., page 554.


But once again, as is noted above, the claim of "Adultery" is purely Rome's blame-shift "tradition" and "cover-story".  The actual word used is "fornication" in the text to describe NICHOLAITANS is FORNICATION.   A term used for sexual activity of UNMARRIED MEN. "Fornication" exist, where there IS NO COVENANT TO BREAK.  Whereas "Adultery" is "unfaithfulness" to a PRE-EXISTING COVENANT.  THE NICHOLAITANS have no "covenant" to "break", either in a FIGURATIVE, or LITERAL sense.




The customary greeting for the occasion is a "io, Saturnalia!" — io (pronounced "yo") being a Latin interjection related to "ho" (as in "Ho, praise to Saturn"). - SATURNALIA, WIKIPEDIA, 1-25-2007



One of the characteristics mentioned about the "Nicholaitans" is overt anti-semitism to Jewish practices still observed in the New Testament community.  The rejection of the "Judaism" of the original apostles in favor of a Roman syncretism is specified in the text on key points distinctive of New Testament Judiasm, and noted as having been openly rejected by the "Nicholaitans".

Their behavior is linked to "Balam" who was famous for "prophesying" against ISRAEL in the Tanakh.  Medieval Rome's posture toward both Jews and Judaism is historically well known, and further illustrates this perversion did not "pass away" as is claimed, but became "the mainstream", thanks to the work of Constantine.

Rev 2:14,15  But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. 

(of Israel)

The CHILDREN: Literally in Hebrew "Sons" (Young boys) 

The overt rejection of Judaism as practiced among the New Testament orthodox community, and the Nicholaitans doctrine of teaching "syncretism" with Roman imperial (secret society) religion and customs, put the Nicholaitans squarely in the camp of another ancient practice, which is never mentioned by Rome, oddly enough.  And usually, when Rome goes silent on something, it is because you have stumbled across what they have been hiding.  That ancient practice, that the Nicholaitans would have obviously embraced, and having been described in Rome's own Sibylline oracles as having been found in every ethnic and national group within the empire, with the only exception being Jews, i.e., Pederasty (Pedophile sex by authority figures with minors).  More will be discussed about this below as well.  The overt rejection of New Testament Judiasm by the Nicholaitans put them squarely in the camp of Rome's secret traditions and practices of Pedophilia.The use of the term "Porneuo" in the New Testament text, is a term used for the sexual activity of UNMARRIED MEN.  Not "wife swapping" as is "claimed" by Rome's "Traditions".

The Roman legal codes proscribed using the sexual property of another Roman male (head of household) for unmarried sex, consequently the acceptable institutions where the practice was conducted and to some degree thus institutionalized were there academy, where young adults were "bachelors" (thus the origin of the term "bachelour's degree" and the orphan,i.e. "orphanage")   The Nicholaitan's use of "orphanages" because thus particularly important as a part of it's secret cult.




2Pe 2:15  Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following THE WAY OF BALAAM (Sun-god worshipper) the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness; (Using religion for commerce)

Jud 1:11  Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the ERROR OF BALAAM for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core. (Opposing God's people, Using religion for money)

Rev 2:14  But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold THE DOCTRINE OF BALAAM, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel (Antisemitism), to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. (Syncretism with "pagan gods")

Rev 2:24  But unto you I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as many as have not THIS DOCTRINE, and which have not known THE MYSTERY OF SATAN, as they speak; I will put upon you none other burden. (Monism between God and Satan)

Rev 2:6  But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of THE NICOLAITANS, which I also hate. (Saturnalia)

Rev 2:15  So hast thou also them that hold THE DOCTRINE of THE NICOLAITANS, which thing I hate. (Saturnalia)



Rom 1:20-23  For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.  Professing themselves to be wise (the Collegium Pontificum), they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into AN IMAGE (Icon) made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 

2Pe 3:15,16  And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction

2Pe 2:14,15  Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children: Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following THE WAY OF BALAAM the son of Bosor, who LOVED THE WAGES of unrighteousness; 

Rom 11:18-20  Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: 

Rom 11:25  For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the 

2Pe 2:1-3  But there were false prophets also among the people, 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 ("poloos", majority) 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: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. 


Origin of "The Doctrine Of Balaam", "The Doctrine Of The Nicolaitans" and "Mystery of Satan" Heresy In 65-95 CE  [Rev 2:6,14,15,24]


Taken from Num 24:17  I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come A STAR ["kâvâh" = Blazing one, i.e., Helios] out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth. 

Act 7:43  Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, figures which ye made to worship them: and I will carry you away beyond Babylon

 Act 7:43 REMPHAN: the Ishmaelitish and Persian languages, signifies Saturn; and so does Rephan in the Egyptian language: - Gill's Exposition Of The Bible

The texts vary between Remphan, Rephan, and Romphan. It is supposed to be the Coptic name for Saturn, to which the Arabs, Egyptians, and Phoenicians paid divine honors.

MOLOCH/SATURN: Was forced to regurgitate HIS THREE SONS, Poseidon, Zeus and Hades.  The event was marked by the image of THREE YOUTHS.  The Moloch/Saturn STAR was associated with BABYLON, as related in Acts 7:43.  The THREE YOUTHS of SATURN, was a repetitive "theme" in "mystery Religion".

Since the SATURNALIA was the celebration of SATURN, these themes would naturally be associated with the observance.


Taken from Mal 4:2  But unto you that fear my name shall THE SUN [Lit. "Shamash"] of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall. 

Taken to mean the "True SECRET Name of The Sun-god SHAMASH or HELIOS" as a form of "wisdom", 
rather than CONTRASTS of the true God (creator) who made the Sun, as everything else in creation.


2Pe 3:16 ...which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction



2Th 2:7-12  For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: ...And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:  That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. [Taken from 1Ki 22:22,23, 2Ch 18:21,22]


2Th 2:3-4  ...the man of sin will be revealed, the son of perdition;  Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the sanctuary of God, shewing himself that he is God. [Taken from Ge.10:8,9, 11:3-9] 


In case all of this were not already OBVIOUS enough concerning the DOCTRINE OF SYNCRETISM, taught by the NICHOLAITANS (and as it is still taught to this day by those who "venerate him"), the precise and specific use of the term "WHICH THING I HATE" make these matter even more graphic.  Unlike that which might be excpected, the actual phrase "WHICH THING I HATE" is only used 2 times in the entire Tanakh. One twice.

(1) Psa 101:3  I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes: I hate the work of them that turn aside; it shall not cleave to me. 

(2) Jer 44:3-4  Because of their wickedness which they have committed to provoke me to anger, in that they went to burn incense, and to serve other gods, whom they knew not, neither they, ye, nor your fathers. Howbeit I sent unto you all my servants the prophets, rising early and sending them, saying, Oh, do not this abominable thing that I hate. 

BOTH INSTANCES refer to Idolatry, and SYNCRETISM with OTHER GODS. BOTH.  But that is not all. JEREMIAH's denunciation specially refers to this practice mentioned in detail:


Jer 10:1  Hear the Word which YHVH speaks against you, house of Israel. 

Jer 10:2   YHVH says, LAMAD/[goad/teach] not the DEREK/[Course/path] of the GOY/[Herded] and do not CHATHATH/[Prostrate/worship] at theOTH/[Appearing] of the SHAMAYIM [heavens/Astrological bodies]   - LITERALLY "DO NOT DO AS THE GENTILES DO, DO NOT WORSHIP AT THE SOLSTICE"

Jer 10:3  For CHUQQAH/[Ordinance] of the  'AM/[Congregations, from Aw'mam, Association, Hidden]  are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of theTYA'AR/[Tree Grove]the work of the YADIM [Order/Ministry] of the CHARASH/[Mason/Craftsman], with the axe. 






Act 7:43  Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of MOLOCH, and the star of your god REMPHAN, figures which ye made to worship them: and I will carry you away beyond Babylon

 Act 7:43 REMPHAN: the Ishmaelitish and Persian languages, signifies SATURN (MOLOCH); and so does Rephan in the Egyptian language: - Gill's Exposition Of The Bible

"(The idol of Moloch/Saturn) was made an hollow image, placed within seven chancels or chapels; and whoever offered fine flour, they opened to him the first; if turtle doves or two young pigeons, they opened the second; if a lamb, they opened the third; if a ram, they opened the fourth; if a calf, they opened the fifth; if an ox, they opened the sixth; but whoever offered his son, they opened the seventh: his face was a calf's, and his hands were stretched out, as a man opens his hands to receive any thing from his friend; and they make him hot with fire, and the priests take the infant and put it into the hands of Molech, and the infant expires: and wherefore is it called Topher and Hinnom? Tophet, because they make a noise with drums, that its father may not hear the voice of the child, and have compassion on it, and return to it; and Hinnom, because the child roars, and the voice of its roaring ascends.'' - R. David Kimchi in 2 Kings xxiii. 10

The "generic" word Children is a little ambigious because it is actually SAINT NICHOLAS'S connection to THREE CHILDREN in particular.  These are the THREE CHILDREN of the SATURNALIA, that SATURN was forced to GIVE UP (Regurgitate) in Roman mythology, the THREE CHILDREN is a recurring THEME in Roman Mystery religion, and no doubt influenced the adoption of the idea of a "Trinity".  The entire mythology was divided into repeating sections of THREE.  There were THREE MEN who were the judges of HADES; Minos, Rhadamanthus and Aeacus.  There were the THREE FATES, the THREE GRACES, the THREE levels of YGGDRASIL, the THREE NORNS who spun the thread of destiny and eventually what became the "Christian Trinity" with the THREE OGDOADS.  SATURN'S THREE CHILDREN were JUPITER, PLUTO, and NEPTUNE.

Anything with the number three in it would of course become important symbolism for "mystery Babelism" religion.  The connection of the SATURNALIA with the THREE CHILDREN or THREE YOUTHS, would become the basis for the mythological claims that "Saint Nicholas" cared for "Orphans" or "Children".  The THREE SONS of SATURN were eventually made ORPHANS when ZEUS returned to exact revenge on SATURN for eating them to begin wtih.  The earliest Iconographic NATIVITY SCENE known to hummanity, included NOT THREE "WISE MEN", but THREE YOUTHS, just as you see above in the depictions of "Saint Nicholas" with the THREE YOUTHS.  The only thing is that the arcehological discovery, recovered in the catacombs of ROME, from a ROMAN "CHRISTIAN", happened only a few years ago. INSTEAD OF THREE WISEMEN, THEY FOUND THREE YOUTHS.

Because the symbolisms have been "syncritized" with Roman gods and goddessess, and simply swapped the closest "cognates", THE THREE YOUTHS at the SOLSTICE-NATIVITY, are depicted as the "THREE YOUTHS FROM BABYLON", supposedly representing the THREE YOUTHS that were thrown into the fiery furnace during the time of DANIEL.  The only problem of course, is that their garments are PERSIAN, not Babylonian.  PERSIAN.  At the time, the SOLAR-CULT of MITHRAISM, the SHAB-E YALDA, imported from PERSIA.

But the THREE YOUTH associated with the SOLSTICE-NATIVITY, doesn't simply stop with SATURN, and the regurgitation of his THREE SONS, this is a deeply imbeded mystery symbol in Babelism from it's oldest expression, and it actually directly related to DEVA (Devil) worship.  The oldest images in the world, relating to MOTHER-GODDESS worship and DURING THE SOLSTICE, involve THE SAME THREE YOUTHS, depicted during ROME'S SATURNALIA!  The FACT IS, the THREE DIFFERENT COLORS in the THREE YOUTHS do NOT represent "the three different races of man" as Christmas Apollo-gists attempt to claim.  They represent the same thing in these depictions, that the three differnet colors represent in HINDUISM, or with JUPITER, PLATO and NEPTUNE... the THREE ELEMENTS, or THREE SPHERES of the WORLD.  

The Racial associations (if there are any at all) are nothing more than an accidental after-thought.  If THE THREE YOUTHS depicted in these catacomb pictures WERE the exiled JEWS in BABYLON, they would ALL HAVE THE SAME SEMETIC RACIAL FEATURES, but they do not.  So if they are THE THREE YOUTHS, from DANIEL, why do they HAVE THREE DIFFERENT COLORS?   AND Why are they DRESSED PERSIAN? Look to the left and you will see.

The historical record has been made clear in these discoveries and even the modern art of our own recent age as illustrated in the Saint Nicholas pictures above, clearly demonstrate that "Saint Nicholas" was a "cognate Saint" for SATURN, and this equation non-sense is nothing more than standard procudure for ROME and it's "Saints".  The entire ROMAN PANTHEON has a "cognate SAINT", and why any Protestant would be so foolish to think THIS ONE SAINT, is somehow completely different than all the rest of them, is beyond logic.  

There are over 6,300 saints, piled on top of each other for every day of the year, and some serious Protestant students of Roman Cahtolicism have estimated half of them never even existed.  They just literally made up stories to fit one of their Roman "gods". But somehow Protestants (who should know better) wish to believe this one is any "different".




Of all the imagery and symbolism one could pick and place with the "Virgin Mary", Balaam is the very character that the NICHOLAITANS were accused of "following" literally comparing or associating their TEACHING with BALAAM.  The same shown in the earliest iconographic representations of "Christ-Mass" solstice worship found anywhere on earth.

Rev 2:14,15  But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. 

Taken from Num 24:17  I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come A STAR

Probably from the same as H3522 (in the sense of rolling) or H3554 (in the sense of blazing); a star (as round or as shining); figuratively 

Being a similar term found in Isaiah 14:2

Isa 14:12  How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! 

BDB Definition:
Lucifer = “light-bearer”
1) shining one, morning star, Lucifer
1a) of the king of Babylon and Satan (figuratively)

Rev 2:24  But unto you I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as many as have not THIS DOCTRINE, and which have not known THE MYSTERY OF SATAN, as they speak; I will put upon you none other burden. (Monism between God and Satan)

In the Biblical Narrative, the "Star" is associated with Christ's INFANCY, not his actual birth.  This was changed by "tradition" to place it within the "Nativity" scene, as the actual "Birth" of the Baal-Helios of Balaam.

2Pe 2:15  Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following THE WAY OF BALAAM the son of Bosor.  

Even the element of "Commercialism" is found in the text associated with the practice, as the remainder of the text mentions that Balaam tried to prophesy lies in exchange for money citing "who loved the wages of unrighteousness".  Obviously, the Roman artists doing these paintings, were probably compensated for their labor, and guilty of violating the first Torah commandments concerning religious "images".


The "magii" are here, originally interpeted not as 3 Kings, but "3 YOUTH" from Babylon finding the true "Shamash" (Babylonian sun-god a/k/a Apollo) born on the Solstice concluding the SATAURNALIA.  CHILDREN had been sacrificed to MOLOCH/SATURN since it's earliest celebrations in the ancient Mediterranean.  The connection of "Christmas" and "Children" are reflected in this very first iconographic representation, created by what was known among the New Testament community a century earlier as "The Nicolaitans", whose patron Saint was a mysterious "Saint Nicolas".

As you can see in this earliest iconographic representation ever found, the THREE YOUTHS are DIFFERENT COLORS.  It is claimed by Christ-Mass "Apollo-gists", that this 'represents' the THREE YOUTHS from Babylon.  But those THREE YOUTHS were all three JEWS of Semitic appearance.  These THREE YOUTHS are different colors because they echo THE THREE YOUTHS OF SATURN which represented the three SPHERES, Sky, Ocean and the underworld in Zeus, Posidion, Pluto.  The fact that this is found here, and in the earliest "Christ-Mass" iconographic scenes ever discovered demonstrates the syncretism was it's focus.

Rev 2:6  But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of THE NICOLAITANS, which I also hate. (Saturnalia)

Rev 2:15  So hast thou also them that hold THE DOCTRINE of THE NICOLAITANS, which thing I hate. (Saturnalia)

The "Wise men" in the Scriptures, were not Gentile "Astrologers", a practice involving Divination using pagan gods, and actually condemned with the death penalty, in the Torah. ["Wiseman",i.e., Hakham, is the specific Jewish title for a karaite spiritual leader].  It is claimed karaites did not yet exist (as part of the historical revisionism of the CHRISTM-MASS LIE), though they are referenced in the New Testament, and associated with Christ, his followers and their practice of Judaism. 


In the same excavation, Christ as Apollo, the good shepherd, is pictured in the reddish-orange circle {sun} flanked by two sacred solstice trees.  All three of these scenes, Balaam and the Virgin Mary, Christ as Apollo, and the three Youths from Babylon finding Shamash, are all found in ROME, in the "Tomb of Priscilla" in the "Catacombs", initially by tradition, where Christians "hid from persecution", but recent archeology has demonstrated they were holding "funerary meals" (communion with the dead) or i.e., in other words, "seances", a practice from Necromancy.  This alleged "early (coming centuries after Christ) "Christian symbolism" that is used,  is clearly and simply integrated within the framework of Roman Empire gods and their customary practices of sun-god worship, divination and necromancy.  "Real Christians", those found in the New Testament, actually still Jewish, would have had nothing to do with the catacombs, or painting religious imagery in direct violation of the Commandments, and cited with the same force in Acts 7:43 concerning even the visual symbolism of solar worship found in the synagogue.


Below the actual floor of the Vatican's Saint Peter's bascillica is the record of history in stone, that these people where those who had equated Apollo as Christ (Apollyon 9:11)  There is no way to deny this is in fact what occured historically.  The only possible route of defense for it, is to make the incendiary and possibly blasphemous claim God and Satan are actually the same.  (Thus why the argument is made and taught within the context of Rome's "Secret societies")

This early teaching is mentioned ver batim, with these very practices, in the text of the New Testament and condemned:

Rev 2:24  But unto you I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as many as have not THIS DOCTRINE, and which have not known THE MYSTERY OF SATAN, as they speak; I will put upon you none other burden. (Monism between God and Satan)



In the same excavation as was found the earliest known Christmas "Nativity scene" on earth, hundreds of years after Christ, Christ as Apollo, the good shepherd, is pictured in the reddish-orange circle {sun} flanked by two sacred solstice trees.  All three of these scenes, (1) Balaam and the Virgin Mary, (2) Christ as Apollo, and (3) the three Youths from Babylon finding the real Shamash, are all found in ROME, in the "Tomb of Priscilla" in the "Catacombs", initially by tradition, where Christians "hid from persecution", but recent archeology has demonstrated they were holding "funerary meals" (communion with the dead) or i.e., in other words, "seances", a practice from Necromancy openly known and taught by another of Rome's famous "Church fathers" Ambrose.  "Christian symbolism" that is used in these syncretisms, is simply integrated within the framework of Roman Empire's gods and goddesses and their customary practices of sun-god worship, divination and necromancy.  In other words, a religion which is intrinsicly NOT CHRISTIAN.



To See What ROME Was Calling It's "Christianity"
And Who It Chose As It's "Church Fathers" 


Rev 21:8  ...idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. 




The connection between "Saint Nicholas" and "Children" is an ancient one and according to the "official story" the connection is made because "Saint Nicholas" was a wonderful "Saint" who cared for "orphans", and brought "gifts" to them on the birthday of Satan (and "Christ" seeing they are one and the same according to "Nicholaitans").  But the story becomes unraveled when you begin comparing the documentation from the New Testament with what is actually and factually known from real history.

According to Rome's own lies, they virtually have no clue who he was or when he really lived, and when compensating for this earlier admission insisting that the most recent lies, are the ones most reliable and "true", are faced with the fact that their own documentation from the same period of history, invalidate their own claims.  The factis ROME knows way more than they wish to admit about who and what "Saint Nicholas" really was.  And has been already shown above, Rome fully embraces the idea of routine Utilitarian deceit for the promotion of it's "Church". Obviously, if "tellling a Santa-Clause lie" works better for them, than the truth, you will hear the "Santa-Clause lie", with a "wink and a nod".  If you have "mixed" worshiping God with worshiping the Devil, these ideas are no longer objectionable.

But you have seen above, solid concrete archeological proof, that the "Apostates" referred to in the New Testament as the "Nicholaitans", along with their "Doctrine" are clearly recorded in stone.  And these "apostates" and their "doctrine" centered around "youth", but had nothing to do with "Orphans" as is now claimed, except in one regard. An ancient practice in ROME known as PEDERASTY which was commonly done during ROME'S "JUVENALIA", another one of Rome's blow-out parties celebrated around (immediately after) the Solstice.  This one centering on "love for children".


"Saint Nicholas" is depicted as a Roman Bishop, a celebate of course, as all Roman Bishops were, but in the New Testament, there is a graphic description of a strain of theology or "tradition" that is directly related to "Celebacy".  Celebacy is a practice alien to normative Judaism, even the reformed karaite kind being advocated in the New Testament.  In fact, though Paul himself is often cited as "Celebate", Paul was actually a divorcee.  And rabbinical Judaism, from which Paul was a defector, practiced the requirement of "marriage" to even be a Rabbi, thus leading groups like those who enjoy the DaVinci Code fictions, to speculate perhaps Christ was also married, as he was addressed by the title in Israel.

Paul went so far as to list "marriage" as a requirement for being a "Bishop", which obviously rules out all of ROME's celebate clergy from even being qualified to be "Bishops", meaning that in New Testament terms, the Church of Rome has not within it, a single qualified "Bishop" and hasn't had for more than a thousand years.

1Ti 3:2  A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of a wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 
But with this celebate movement cited in the New Testament is a peculair reference to a "doctrine".  It is referred to as "Doctrines of Devils" in the KJV.  Most modern English etymologies have changed their listings for the given Eytmology of the old English word "Devil".  If you consult older sources on the English word prior to the publication of the newer politically correct versions, you will discover that the Old Enlgish word "Devil" is from the same word as "Devi".  This has been glossed over in the newer versions to avoid being offensive, presumably.  The Webster's International 3 Volume set, prior to the 1980s, will give the complete etymology back to the Sanskrit showing the connection.  It's pretty logical, and is usually borne out in Etymologies, that when you have two words in English missing only a single letter, there might be a connection between how the two actually came about.
But reguardless of the Old English Etymology displays the connection, the New Testament was not written in English, and it's content (at one time reflected in certain English etymologies) make it clear that the gods and goddesses worshiped by the polytheists of it's day, were considered "devils" or "demons" (i.e., supernatural spirits that were not on the side of the monotheistic God).  Thus "Devas" and "Devis" were usually what the New Testament referred to when it used the word translated "devils" in the KJV.
Thus, "doctrines of devils" would be clearly "polytheistic" doctrines. The doctrines of "devas" and "devis" instead of those taught by the students of Yehushoa and his Apostles, who followed the Jewish monotheistic God,  "HaShem".  Hinduism, even beyond the now obscure Greco-Roman polytheism of New Testament times, is the oldest polytheism practiced today, and shared with western polytheism a mutual history emerging out of Mesopotamia.

1Ti 4:1-3 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry...

The "children" as a part of the "Saint Nicholas" cult, emerges not so much from anything "Saint Nicholas" may or may not have ever done, but as part of it's mystery "doctrine", which was based on the belief in syncretistic monism.  This "doctrine" (of the first Nicholaitans most dramatically expressed in the syncretism of Saturnalia with Christ) can be traced through the Scirptures, into Pre-Constantinain archeology, through the various "Church councils" and right up to our current day, without a single break in it's chain of transmission. (By people who claim the "Nicholaitans" dissappeared) Poof! Like magic. They just went away.
These claims underscore the disconnected realities of what Rome calls it's "Church History", because we read in the New Testament, that this same movement was large enough as early as 65-95 CE, to threaten to literally over-run communities connected to New Testament orthodoxy.  And while they are mentioned by different names, they are literally predicted in the New Testament to become the dominant "Imperial" version by the very Apostles who saw their rise to power as a serious and inevitable threat to the truth.
They are overtly linked to the Roman Saturnalia, and it's apostacy both in terms of moral degeneracy, and (and perhaps this is most important of all) in terms of it's syncronistic "doctrine", and it's embrace of "devis/devas" (devils), in the name of "Christ". And in particular, that of APOLLO. (Rev.9:11)
Calling "Ha Satawn" God, (and or sun-deity [the lake of fire] worship) of course, in the veiw of the Monotheistic prophets, from Abraham to Mohammed, is a form of Blashphemy which results in damnation, leaving it's victim incapable of discerning God from Satan in their soul, and unforgivable in terms of one's eternal state, apart from real personal thorough repentance.

Spreading this "Doctrine" of course, would be pretty hideous.  Using children to do it, would justify the lowest hottest most forever parts of hell one could probably imagine (along with serial killing pedophiles perhaps) in that it spiritually destroys the innocent before they even get the chance to make a fair honest informed adult decision to end up that way.  Nicholaitan clergy do not see any of this as a problem, because none of the actual content of the scriptures is really considered TRUE.  Their entire approach to religion in general is pretty much like the "wink, wink" of their chief mascot of religion, Santa Clause, himself. (A childish known lie we believe anyway, and "pretend" is true, to "get presents")

That is what has been "inherited" in the west, in the form of "Christ-mass", which is the worship of Apollo mixed with the words and concepts of "Christ" (the Christ of those with the "mark of the Beast" Rev.9:11), so that they become indistinguishable.  It is a "doctrine" which uses a string of twisted logic to justify this spiritual exchange between God and Satan (devil worship) seem "acceptable". 

This doctrine of "Sophistry Syncretism" between God and Satan has been carried outside the Roman Church in the form of the Masons, and other similar secret or (esoteric) societies, which remained firmly planted in Anglo culture, from England's split with Rome, prior to the actual reformation itself, when such doctrines became the object of scrutiny and rejection by many later Protestants.  King James, also a Mason, and his translation work, along with the later creation of the "Mason's Bible" (in which the actual doctrines of Babelism were espoused as textual commentary), were spread through Reformation churches, re-introducing the very doctrines the bulk of reformation Protestants were in reality attempting to escape.

Rev 2:24  But unto you I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as many as have not this doctrine, and which have not known the depths of Satan, as they speak; I will put upon you none other burden. 


In the pciture to the left, the reader can see the original European conception of "Saint Nicholas" and his "Devils" which accompany his visitations.  The actual visual representation of his "constant companion" "KRAMPUS" is almost IDENTICAL in many respects to HINDU'S "KALI".  This likeness is not "accidental" by any means, as both are ascribed with the same functions though differing in gender.  Because most are not actually familiar with the history of Apollyon in Rome, it's rather hard for them to discern how this "exchange" is being conducted bewteen God and Devil worship on Christmas, although the remants of this "Doctrine" are still fairly appearant to most on "All Hallow's Eve" (Halloween).  Even charismatic "Christians" who find "Halloween" objectionable, do not realize, that what is happening on Christ-mass, is actually the same thing, if not even worse, or more dangerous for them, spiritually than Halloween.  The standard "mockery" used to justify this spiritual perversion by it's missionaries (i.e., "angels"), is that "Oh, they just don't like any one to have any fun" which usually works for them since most people are actually that shallow.  But the spiritually aware will quickly see through this rather lame and shallow unethical dismissal.

There are many ways to have "fun" that do not necessitate seducing children into devil worship.  People who think about what they are doing, do not consider seducing children into such dark and potentially self-destructive things to actually BE any "fun".  (In fact, it is painful and grievous) to be forced, as an adult or even as a child, into participation with things that sear and violate one's conscience.  "FUN" for them, is having the FREEDOM, to do other, more enjoyable and productive things.  The comment, upon reflection, would be no more valid than a pedophile making the same claim about HIS perverse activity with children (which as you will see below has actually been argued by Rome's Priests in favor of Pedophilia).   Child abuse is not "Fun" to people with a healthy normal conscience, whether it is physical OR spiritual.  And children who find these things objectionable themselves, and are still forced to participate in them by adults with no conscience before God, are emotionally and spiritually abused by Nicholaitans who actually brag they have "the right" to exercise this force.... because "America is a Christian country", always smothering the fact, the "Christians" who came here, were literally risking their very lives, fleeing across an entire ocean to escape compulsory subservience to these perverse Nicholaitan doctrines and their Monarchies of enforcement in European state Churches.



Nicholaitans know, the same thing could be said about their own criticism of Prostitution, drug addiction or contract killing, and they would quickly be able to produce a long list of reasons why their own argument is not actually valid, in order to excuse themselves from the appearant and obvious insanity.  Once again, to people who have not been psychologically damaged by this form of "brainwashing" (i.e., Pavlovian conditioning), it is not "fun" to mix God with Satan, and seduce small children into habitually and ritualistically doing it before they can even give informed  consent as an adults.  The potential loss of the ability to distinguish these two psychological and spiritual polarities apart in their own soul/(or psyche) is something no one, no matter what their personal beliefs might be, could possibly logically defend.  And obviously the consequence of this intentional "mixing" of spirit, if there is anything true about the Bible, it's prophets, or it's messiah at all, would not be "fun" for anyone caught in an eternity with such "con+fusion" between the Lord of Heaven and the Lord of Hell.  The assumption that there is no need to worry because "none of it is true anyway", while obviously being an incredibly strange argument for Nicholaitan "clergy" to argue, or "secret belief" to actually hold and privately advocate (which they do), seeing they make their "money" by insisting and demanding it IS true to societies, it is hwoever, also extremely hypocritical and arrogant.  Arrogant in the sense that what occurs in the psychology of the survival of consciousness after death is not understood by science, and will not be for a very very long time to come.  There are perfectly credible models based on on nothing more than sheared materialistic physics, chemistry and psychology which may be in operation, and whose consequence after death remains permenant. Making the excuses offered by Nicholaitan clergy for these kinds of spiritual and psychological abuses truly inexcusable on every level possible.

SATURNALIA got it's name from SATURN because it is SATURN that is being practiced, honored, conjured up, and invoked through the spiritual-social RITUAL of the SATURNALIA.  Constantine, whose very call to RESTORE OLD SATURN'S REIGN, through the inaguration of Apollo as Christ, fully understood the importance and significance of these RITUALISTIC practices for invoking their (if not at least psychological effects) the very "spirit" of SATURN itself.  Saturn, was the Roman adaptation of MOLOCH.  The deities are actually cultural cognates and are one and the same, as pointed out, bu no less authority and observation than the New Testament itself, who notices the equation as early as the 1st century CE.

WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL PRACTICE OF SATURN/MOLOCH ? (the "Spirit" [or consciousness] that is being invoked?)

"(The idol of Moloch/Saturn) was made an hollow image, placed within seven chancels or chapels; and whoever offered fine flour, they opened to him the first; if turtle doves or two young pigeons, they opened the second; if a lamb, they opened the third; if a ram, they opened the fourth; if a calf, they opened the fifth; if an ox, they opened the sixth; but whoever offered his son, they opened the seventh: his face was a calf's, and his hands were stretched out, as a man opens his hands to receive any thing from his friend; and they make him hot with fire, and the priests take the infant and put it into the hands of Molech, and the infant expires: and wherefore is it called Topher and Hinnom? Tophet, because they make a noise with drums, that its father may not hear the voice of the child, and have compassion on it, and return to it; and Hinnom, because the child roars, and the voice of its roaring ascends.'' - R. David Kimchi in 2 Kings xxiii. 10

The New Testament claims, what we have "inherited" in the practice of "Christ-mass" is a "doctrine" the risen Christ actually "Hates". So naturally, it is pretty hypocritical and pretentious to claim one is "following him" or "serving him" or "worshipping him", when they are "celebrating" something he actually said he "HATES"??? [What Irony]  (But how would you know? if you can't tell him apart from an ancient Roman sun-devil because of Blasphemy and Idolatry you have come to "believe" is your "Christian religion"?)  

Mat 16:26  For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, 
and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? 


Celebacy does not necessarily mean "no sex", it means "no marraige", but sexuality is a completely separate discussion.  One of the claims that ROME uses to distance itself from THE NICHOLAITANS mentioned in the scripture, is that they claim (by way of their own traditions) that THE NICHOLAITANS were marked by "wife-swapping".  Well that is a convenient explanation that gets ROME off the hook, by easily pointing to their "Celebate Priests".  But just because ROME makes it's Priests remain "unmarried", does not mean these very same priests are not "sexually active".  They just commit their "sexual actions" outside of marriage, which only makes matters worse. But there is something a little bit more degenerate about THE NICOLAITANS.  While ROME claims that their primary "sin" was "wife-swapping", that is not exactly what the TEXT in the NEW TESTAMENT actually says. And that minor difference could be MAJOR:

Rev 2:14  But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to COMMIT FORNICATION. So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. 

What this TEXT is actually pointing out, is that the actual TERM ITSELF used of what the NICHOLAITANS were doing is something PRECISELY that ONLY A CELEBATE COULD DO!  Married people COMMIT ADULTERY.  Unmarriaed, or CELEBATE (SINGLE) people commit FORNICATION.  They are actually two different WORDS.


FORNICATION: Strong's# G4203, πορνεύω, porneuō, Pron. porn-yoo'-o, DEFINITION: to act the harlot, that is, (literally) indulge unlawful lust (of either sex), or (figuratively) practise idolatry: - commit (fornication).  From #G4204;  πόρνη, pornē, Pron. por'-nay, a strumpet; figuratively an idolater: - harlot, whore. Feminine of G4205; πόρνος, pornos, por'-nos From πέρνημι pernēmi (to sell; akin to the base of G4097); a (male) prostitute (as venal), that is, (by analogy) a debauchee (libertine): - fornicator, whoremonger.

ADULTERY: G3431, μοιχεύω, moicheuō, moy-khyoo'-o DEFINITION: to commit adultery: - commit adultery.From G3432; μοιχός, moichos, moy-khos', Perhaps a primary word; a (male) paramour; figuratively apostate: - adulterer.

And here is where ROME'S argument collapses entirely.   MARRIED PEOPLE CANNOT COMMIT "πορνεύω" if you are taking the comments STRICTLY LITERALLY, as ROME always wishes to argue.  If we argue this text LITERALLY, then it is a description of something ONLY SINGLE UNMARRIED PEOPLE are doing, (Not Married People).  Thus the CLAIM that THE NICHOLAITANS were "wife-swapping" is contradicted by the TEXT.  What however is NOT contradicted by the text, is that CELEBATES (UNMARRIED) people could have been engaging in sex without being married, and that is precisely and EXACTLY what a ROMAN BISHOP who is not really a BISHOP does, especially when he's boozing it up for the Saturnalia.

In fact, the evidence of this matter could fill a book in itself.  Rome's "Celebate Priests" have had a very long history of secret sordid sexual practices behind the cloak of "celebacy" which stretches are far back as the FIRST NICENE COUNCIL, when regulations were actually passed to BAN their unmarried "Bishops" who aren't really "Bishops" from have regular female guests sleepover in their homes (as an act of charity to a needy female of course).  During the middle ages, a scandal broke out in which one of the inquisitors demanded confession of everyone who had had secret sex with the Priests.  After weeks of confessions they actually shut down the investigation because it was literally so saturated within the Church, it was pointless. Nun abortions have been found buried in the walls of Europe's oldest cathedrals, and here in America, Pedophile suits in the Billions, literally threatened to bankrupt the Vatican.  All of which are described not by the word "μοιχεύω", that applies to "married people", but by the word specifically "πορνεύω", something Roman Clergy uniquely do!!!  And this also agrees with the same descriptions given those who would "Forbid marriage" and "teach doctrines of devils", having their "conscience seared" in HYPOCRISY! How else is a CELEBATE, a "Hypocrite"! When he's SEXUALLY ACTIVE, and hiding it behind the "claim" of CELEBACY!

Another very strange, and admittedly non-investigated matter concerning THE THREE YOUTH symbol. It did appear to be somehow subtlety associated with PEDOPHILIA, as there were pieces of "fine art" that surfaced which displayed sketches, paintings, and drawings of the intimate nude bodies of little boys, under the label of THE THREE YOUTHS! (Artistically drawn, painted, etc., yes, but the subject matter was way too obvious to be dismissed)  


And that simple fact puts a red "X" on the forehead of every Roman priest who is an admitted "follower" of "Saint Nicholas".  And if you wish to argue this is not LITERAL, that is it simply SYMBOLIC. The case gets even worse, for symbolically IT MEANS AN IDOLATER, and what goes on at Rome's "Christmas" more than Idolatry, if ever there were such a thing! 
πορνεύω, (figuratively) to practice idolatry
So if the case is made that the term is "Figurative", then we have aclear reference to "idolatry" and "deity syncretism", both an underpinning of the4 entire ROMAN Imperialist religious tradition.  That clearly connects them by ideology to THE NICHOLAITANS.  If on the other hand you wish to claim that the term is LITERAL, then that even more pointedly points to ROME'S CLERGY, because of the used of the word "porneuo", which LITERALLY means NOT ADULTERY as is used of "wide swapping" done by "married couples" but "fornication" done by UNMARRIED MEN.  The reason this term is specific to THE MALE, is that unmarried women who were "sexually immoral" are described by the term "Harlot" and "Whore".  The "porneuo-ist" is AN UNMARRIED MALE!  ....Or figuratively AN IDOLATOR outside of any covenant with God.  Either way you wish to spin this term, this simple fact puts a red "X" on the forehead of every Roman priest who is an admitted "PORNEUO-IST" by confession of HIS FAITH, and thus "A Nicholaitan" by design.  A design in fact the result of a HISTORICAL CONNECTION... "Saint Nicholas" himself.


The "FIGURATIVE" meaning however, is being "kind" to put it bluntly, although. ROME'S social customs are a matter of public record. And the unavoidable conclusion that ROME'S social customs, including those considered "immoral were being "adopted" by "Bishops" involved with the SAINT NICHOLAS movement called THE NICHOLAITANS.  It is also simply a unavoidable conclusion that a syncretism movement would adopt it's accepted practiced of PEDERASTY.  

But perhaps what the general public is not aware of is that there were certain rules with governed the practiced of socially acceptable PEDOPHILIA in ROME.  Those "rules" are surprisingly consistent which what is known about SAINT NICHOLAS, and point to the unavoidable conclusion that ROME'S long history of PEDOPHILIA has a very real HISTORICAL BASIS in one of it's most ancient and most venerated "SAINTS", that being "SAINT NICHOLAS" of the "NICHOLAITANS".

As you have already seen, from the TEXT in the New Testament, Nicholaitans were NOT PRACTICING "Adultery", they were practing FORNICATION, which can only be done by UNMARRIED men, "Celebates", like those described in 1st Timothy 4:1-3.  But what the text in the New Testament does not specify other than "FORNICATION", it is a particular KIND of FORNICATION that was being practiced by the UNMARRIED ROMAN BISHOP.

"FORNICATION" with the opposite sex was considered offensive, because "Daughters" were considered the property of the ROMAN "PATER FAMILIAS" (The Roman "Father").  The Title of the PATER FAMILIAS entitled the "Father" to complete "ownership" of everything within his household, including slaves and children.  Slaves were obligated to provided whatever services the PATER FAMILIAS requested of them, and this included homosexual sex, from young boys.  Of course, the PEDOPHILIA was "interpeted" as offering "love" and being "loved" by the Roman FATHER, and the practices were considered as being "favored" by a Slave-owner.  Outside of THE MASTER-SLAVE relationship to provide PEDOPHILE SEX for the ROMAN "FATHER", because other "children" also themselves already belonged to a PATER FAMILIAS and were considered their property, the only other socially acceptable avenue for PEDOPHILIA was through relationships established in two forms (1) Boy STUDENTS given to the teacher by the PATER FAMILIAS, and (2) ORPHANS.  Obviously a ROMAN CELEBATE BISHOP (A Teacher) in whose care ORPHANS were found would have been entitled under the Roman customs BOTH to PEDERASTY and PEDOPHILIA.  Obviously, someone zealous to ADOPT Roman social custom, including the worship of their gods, who would have no particular conviction against worshiping what was considered in the New Testament orthodox communities to be worshiping the Devil, would naturally have no objection to Roman customs regarding it's normative customs of PEDOPHILIA and PEDERASTY, particularly at JUVENALIA and SATURNALIA.

The fact that PAN accompanies SAINT NICHOLAS on his "Christ-Mass" outings, is further proof this custom had been incoporporated into ROME'S NICHOLAS CULT.  Pan was notoriously known for LUST.  And he LUSTED after boys.  And the protruding toungue seen in the pictorial illustrations of KRAMPUS, are itself actually a well known symbol, not only in ancient Rome, but throughout the world, for demonic or bestial lust.  The gesture has been even adopted and mimicked on stage by some modern heavy metal rock groups because of this very reason.

From the early Republican times of Ancient Rome, it was perfectly normal for a man to desire and pursue boys.[39] However, penetration was illegal for free born youths; the only boys who were legally allowed to perform as a passive sexual partner were slaves or former slaves known as "freedmen", and then only with regard to their former masters. For slaves there was no protection under the law even against rape.[40] The result was that in Roman times, pederasty largely lost its function as a ritual part of education and was instead seen as an activity primarily driven by one's sexual desires and competing with desire for women. The social acceptance of pederastic relations waxed and waned during the centuries. Conservative thinkers condemned it — along with other forms of indulgence. Tacitus attacks the Greek customs of "gymnasia et otia et turpes amores" (palaestrae, idleness, and shameful loves).[41] The emperors, however, indulged in male love — most of it of a pederastic nature — almost to a man. As Edward Gibbon mentions, of the first fifteen emperors, "Claudius was the only one whose taste in love was entirely correct" — the implication being that he was the only one not to take men or boys as lovers.[42]  Other writers spent no effort censuring pederasty per se, but praised or blamed its various aspects. Martial appears to have favored it, going as far as to essentialize not the sexual use of the catamite but his nature as a boy: upon being discovered by his wife "inside a boy" and offered the "same thing" by her, he retorts with a list of mythological personages who, despite being married, took young male lovers, and concludes by rejecting her offer since "a woman merely has two vaginas."[43] - Martial, Epigrams, XI.43

EDWARD GIBBONS notes that the practice of PEDOPHILIA was so common to ROME that of the first 12 Emperors, Claudius was the ONLY ONE who had "normal" heterosexual desire for women.  The others were all involved in homosexual PEDOPHILE relationships. - Gibbons, The History Of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire.  The fact that "worldly" NICHOLAITANS would adopt ROMAN SEXUAL mores and customs, particularly those of the indulgent kind at ROME'S SATURNALIA and JUVENALIA, should be no suprise to anyone who has studied the history of ROME.



Not only can this be seen in the original adoption of syncretism with ROME'S deities, sexual mores and religious customs, but even in the remaining customs and traditions which have continued from ancient times up unto our very own day.  In heavily influenced Catholic cultures, there are actually still advocates of PEDERASTY, some of whom hold very high positions of political power and academic esteem within formerly Protestant America. One example of this is found at the University of Massachusetts, yes the same Massachusetts that runs down the Protestant Pilgrims every Thanksgiving:

William Armstrong Percy, a gay history professor at the University of Massachusetts. Percy is the author of a book entitled Pederasty and Pedagogy in Ancient Greece. A reviewer for the book has this to say: Pederasty was from the beginning both physical and emotional, the highest and most intense type of male bonding. These pederastic bonds, Percy believes, were responsible for the rise of Hellas and the 'Greek miracle': in two centuries the population of Attica, a mere 45,000 adult males in six generations, produced an astounding number of great men who laid the enduring foundations of Western thought and civilization.  Percy would have us believe that all the wonders of civilization are owed to the fact that Greek homosexuals were allowed to exploit children sexually. Further, in The Gay and Lesbian Review Worldwide he writes that "for the Greeks a sexual relationship between an adolescent male and an adult male could under the proper circumstances involve the youth in a loving and supportive union." He admits that the "adolescent" males might have been as young as twelve. 3 That such trash could come from a history professor at a prestigious university is nothing less than appalling. - HISTORY PROFESSOR argues for PEDERASTY


The power held by the pater familias was called patria potestas, "paternal power." Potestas is distinct from auctoritas, also held by the pater. Under the laws of the Twelve Tables, the pater familias had vitae necisque potestas—the "power of life and death"—over his children, his wife (in some cases), and his slaves, all of whom were said to be sub manu, "under his hand." For a slave to become a freedman, he would have to be delivered "out of the hand" of the pater familias, hence the terms manumissio and emancipatio. At law, at any rate, his word was absolute and final. If a child was unwanted, under the Roman Republic the pater familias had the power to order the child put to death by exposure. He had the power to sell his children into slavery; Roman law provided, however, that if a child has been sold as a slave three times, he is no longer subject to the patria potestas. The pater familias has the power to approve or reject marriages of his sons and daughters; however, an edict of the Emperor Caesar Augustus provided that the pater familias could not withhold that permission lightly.  Only a Roman citizen could enjoy the status of pater familias. There could only be one holder of the office within a household. Even male adult children remained under the authority of their fathers while he still lived, and could not acquire the rights of a pater familias while he was yet alive; at least in legal theory, all their property was acquired on behalf of their fathers, and he, not they, had ultimate authority to dispose of it. Those who lived in their own households at the time of the father's death succeeded to the status of pater familias over their respective households. - PATER FAMILIAS, Encyclopedia,

Part of the prophecy concerning the "Apostacy" involved predicting the development of a "doctrine" identified in the New Testament as something known in theological circles as "anitnomianism", which is literally "Anti-Law" or "Anti-Torah" .  It is translated "Lawlessness".  THE NCIHOLAITANS were obviously an "anti-Torah" group if there ever had been.  Another fact that demonstrates THE NICHOLAITANS had adopted the ROMAN practice of PEDOPHILE sex, is that it is recorded in the SIBYLLINE ORACLES, these practices were so widespread ONLY THE JEWS refused to participate in them:

[The Jews] are mindful of holy wedlock,
and they do not engage in impious intercourse with male children,
as do Phoenicians, Egyptians and Romans,
spacious Greece and many nations of other,
Persians and Galatians and all Asia, transgressing
the holy law of immortal God, which they transgressed.
- Where is boasting? By Simon J. Gathercole; p.175

TORONTO, Nov. 2 ( - LifeSite has learned that an Oct. 27 concert at St. Basil's Catholic Church in Toronto featured a composition by Gerald Hannon, Canada's leading advocate of "intergenerational sex," or pedophilia. Hannon was part of the choir and he was applauded separately after the piece by the musicians and those in attendance. ...Hannon is one of Canada's most outspoken defenders of pedophilia. In Dec. 1977 he published an article, entitled "Men Loving Boys Loving Men," wherein he discussed favourably and explicitly homosexual sex acts with boys as young as seven years of age. The article led to criminal charges, but Hannon was acquitted - PEDOPHILIA ADVOCATE FEATURED IN CATHOLIC CHURCH CONCERT, 2-11-2000, Life Site,

Aix-en-Provence, France - A Roman Catholic priest on trial in this southern French town for failing to disclose the sexual abuse of minors has argued that the paedophilic acts that took place in his parish were actually good for the children.  Father Hubert Barral, 67, who heads the parish in the village of Vernegues, faces up to five years in prison if convicted on a charge of failing to assist a person in danger and failing to report a crime.  …  Barral had also told one of the children that making love was a way of being in touch with God. - Sapa-AFP - PRIEST SAYS PEDOPHILIA WAS GOOD FOR CHILDREN, September 04 2001, IOL


Current estimates of Roman Catholic priests in the U.S.= 49,000 to 50,000

Independent estimates of pedophile priests = 3,000 (6.1%) to 8,000 (16.3%)

188 Dioceses in the U.S. 

Low estimate (3,000 -/- 188) = 16 perpetrators per diocese
High estimate (8,000 -/- 188) = 42 perpetrators per diocese

Current experts claim a pedophile could abuse 200-265 children in a lifetime.
200 x 16 perps/diocese =
 3,200 victims/diocese
200 x 42 perps/diocese = 8,400 victims/diocese
3,200 victims/diocese x 188 dioceses = 601,600 victims in U.S.
8,400 victims/diocese x 188 dioceses = 1,579,200 victims in U.S.

Average American family consists of 4-6 people
(3,200 victims/diocese) 601,600 victims x 4 family members =
 2,406,400 indirect victims
60l,000 victims x 6 family members = 3,609,600 indirect victims
(8,400 victims/diocese) 1,579,200 x 4 family members = 6,316,800 indirect victims
1,579,200 x 6 family members = 9,475,200 indirect victims

These numbers are a reflection of immediate family only and do not reflect the indirect victims within the parishes that are affected.  188 Bishops are responsible for the pain of at least 601,600 direct victims and as many as 9,475,200 indirect victims — a total of as many as 10,076,800 peopleUsing the lower numbers the number of direct victims and survivors alone could populate a city larger than Boston. Using the higher numbers, it would be the fourth largest city in the U.S.— one between the size of Houston and Chicago.. From 2002 - 2007, Catholic authorities in the United States paid out around 2.8 billion dollars in damages to victims." -AFP article "Jesuits to pay 50 MILLION DOLLARS to abuse victims in Alaska  - SEXUAL DEGREGRADATIN BEHIND STAINED GLASS

The most recent example as been the exposure of secret NICHOLAITAN PEDERASTY practices discovered in IRELAND - PRIEST SEX ABUSE CASE STIRS POLITICAL STORM IN IRELAND






Rev 2:14  But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. 

The oldest known physical monument of the cult of St. Nicholas seems to be the church of SS Priscus and Nicholas built at Constantinople by the emperor Justinian. Who was Justinian I?


He was responsible for the JUSTINIAN CODE, one of the most oppressive anti-Semitic legal codes in the history of the Roman Empire.



    Building synagogues,

    Reading the Bible in Hebrew,

    Assembling in public,

    Celebrating Passover before Easter, 

    Testifying against any Catholic in court.


 The religious center of the Nicholaitans moved their Patron Saint Nicholas in 1087, to the city of Bari, Italy, where his alleged “bones” were brought from Turkey.  There the Nicholaitan veneration of the Patron Saint Nicolas, practicing it's theology of syncretism, merged with the pagan female deity Pasqua Epiphania*, who filled children's stockings with gifts. - Clement Miles, Christmas Customs and Traditions: Their History and Significance, New York: Dover Publications, 1976, pp. 178, 263-271.


* EPIPHANIA -  "the appearance; miraculous phenomenon, "the shining forth" " – a/k/a Astarte associated with Venus [the morning star heralding the appearance of the SUN rise] English “EPIPHANY”


From Italy, under the supervision and support of the Roman Church, the Nicholaitans carried veneration of their Patron Saint through Roman Catholicism north until it reached Scandinavia. Scandinavians still worshipped the Scandinavian adaptation of the Old pantheon, whose principle deity was the Norwegian Odin [or Woden], instead of the Greek ZeusOdin, as Zeus, was the father of Thor, Balder and Tiw.  Balder was the Scandinavian equivalent of APOLLO. Balder was the sun-god of the Scandinavians. Thus ODIN [as the father of Balder]  becomes "father Christ-mass", [literally the "Father" of Balder] Balder being cognate with Apollo-Christ, the (son)sun-god.

ODIN, (the Norwegian ZEUS), had a long white beard, was often depicted dressed in RED, and rode a horse through the sky once a year in Autumn.  When SAINT NICHOLAS was layered on top of the Scandinavian god ODIN, Nicholas lost his Mediterranean appearance, grew a long white beard, mounted a flying horse, and changed the date of his “flight” in the sky to December, still wearing his wooly Scandinavian Reds. [A costume similar in design to one worn by the Pope] In the bid for pagan converts in Scandinavia and Northern Europe, Rome promoted the veneration of Saint Nicholas and taught he did (and they should) distribute gifts on December 25th. The "Gifts in the Stockings" had been incorporated into the Saint's Veneration, since its arrival in Bari, Italy and its fusion with Pasqua Epiphania.


THE PLOT THICKENS: Unfortunately, just as ROME had continued APOLLO under the veneer of phoney "CHRIST", this was nothing more than the continuation of Odin, with a Roman make-over under the veneer of its phoney SAINT NICHOLAS. [Which itself was nothing more than a historical lie hiding their own connections to the Christianized SATURNALIA CULT of the NICOLAITANS mentioned in the same writings they had first banned, and then canonized]




Most Americans are not aware of the history of this "Saint Nicholas" associated with CHRIST-MASS due to the fact that in America, our version has been culturally "sanitized" for public consumption and mass media advertising.  But in Roman Catholic Europe, where the Saint Nicholas of CHRIST-MASS originated, older observances of him were true to their religious nature.  Saint Nicholas was a character which was often "feared" by children. Why?


Because Saint Nicholas brought with him his "friends", and unlike the American version of cute little green elves, his "friends" were in charge of "punishing" as well.  While the characters which comprised Saint Nicholas's "friends" varied from country to country in Europe, they all shared one function.  That of inflicting fear and punishment on children who failed to "conform" to the religious regiment of the Catholic Church.  This "punishment" ranged from getting sticks and coal for presents to more the more severe expressions of physical beatings.


Knecht Ruprecht would beat the children for being 'bad" and would threaten to "eat them".  Knecht Ruprecht while claiming by some to be associated with a Roman bishop, is often depicted with goat legs. In Switzerland, called Schmutzlie, he would threaten to put children into a sack and take them back to the Black Forest.  In other accounts he would threaten to throw the sack in the river and drown the children.


In highly Catholic regions, the local priest would be informed by the parents about their children's behavior and visit the homes in person to beat the child with a rod.  In parts of Austria local tradition involves "Krampus runs" (Krampuslaufe) where Nikolaus's helpers roamed the streets during the festival wearing demonic masks and dragging chains behind them, occasionally throwing them at children in their way.


Before the 19th century, Saint Nicholas operated in cooperation with the Devil, whom he subdues and makes his "slave" by chaining him in shackles and then must do his "bidding".  Sometimes the "helper" is the Devil himself, as in Krampus traditions, or the Devil is "symbolized" as a genderless black man,  Zwarte Piet, an African-Moore from Spain, who is then brought into his "service" as a "slave", to do his bidding. The Zwarte Piet and Krampus characters are still observed in Europe to this day. Eventually, the "black-face" Zwarte Piet character was attributed to chimney soot, rather than being a Moore, and the association with Santa-Clause coming down through the chimney was evolved to explain the "black-face".  The Zwarte Piet character is typically portrayed as being "silly" or comically "stupid".


"Black-face" characters have been used throughout the history of racist literature to depict Africans in a derogatory manner. [See BLACKFACE by ]         



In 1809, the novelist Washington Irving (most famous his The Legend of Sleepy Hollow and Rip Van Winkle) wrote a satire of Dutch culture entitled Knickerbocker History.  The satire refers several times to the white bearded, flying-horse riding Saint Nicholas using his Dutch name, Santa Claus.


The Bavarian illustrator Thomas Nast almost completed the modern picture of Santa Claus.  From 1862 through 1886, based on Moore’s poem, Nast drew more than 2,200 cartoon images of Santa for Harper’s Weekly.  Nast gave Santa a home at the North Pole, his workshop filled with elves, and his list of the good and bad children of the world.  

Henry Ford (1863-1947) founded The Ford Motor Company in 1903. His highly publicized anti-Semitic views earned him the honor of being decorated as a Nazi hero by the Third Reich.  


In keeping with his interest in Aryan philosophy, Ford often pictured the Norse icon SANTA CLAUSE in his ads for Ford trucks.


He was also, incidentally, a Mason and an avid promoter of CHRIST - MASS, which he often depicted in his ads.


In 1931, the southern based company in Atlanta, Georgia, the Coca Cola Corporation, followed suite and contracted the Swedish commercial artist Haddon Sundblom to create a coke-drinking Santa.  Sundblom modeled his Santa on his friend Lou Prentice, chosen for his cheerful, chubby face.


Hitler claimed descent from the Norse god ODIN, and along with Ford promoted the observance of the Santa Clause practice as part of the Nazi tradition of CHRIST - MASS recognizing both its racist and Germanic value.


The Christmas celebration in Germanic lands is not an invention of the Christian Church but of our forefathers. The day of the Winter Solstice was holy to our ancestors and the period around the Winter Solstice was filled with the fairyland magic (sorcery) of the Nordic soul. In this period gifts were exchanged without an indecent hind-thought of … Heaven...  The Nordic man did not think of a reward for decent deeds. For us therefore, even the Christian Christmas  REMAINS a festival of Germanic love, Germanic ways and Germanic benevolence - Nazi Governor Wilhelm Kube


The modern Santa Clause Icon originated from the fusion of the pagan Norse god Odin and an apostate religious leader from Asia Minor, mentioned in the book of Revelation by the name of Nicholas, whose followers, the Nicolaitans, we have to thank.




The name “ODIN” means “wrath” or “fury” [as in VATIC] – Literally the same meaning.  He is the God of the dead, and the instigator of Wars. He is also known as a “shape-changer” and the great "DECIEVER". To appease his appetite for death, males were sacrificed to him by hanging them from trees. He was also identified with THE TREE OF SECRET KNOWLEDGE.


He was the Norse cognate to ZeusThe largest temple in the ancient world dedicated to Zeus, was located at the top of the Acropolis in Pergamos.


This is how this deity was viewed by the writers of the New Testament:


Rev 2:13  I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan's throne is: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith,


In BIBLCIAL terms, we are talking about what would have been clearly known as Satan, the same title conferred upon Zeus at Pergamos.


Next time you sit your child on the lap of ODIN dressed in his wooly Scandinavian reds, [knowingly engaging in a lie], you might wish to remember who you are offering your child up to ask for “presents”.




QUOTE: Now before you reject this article and cast it into the trash with all the other crackpot people out there writing about how “Santa is Satan,” let me give you a few historical details. In the High Medieval period during a time which scholars call the Lay Piety Movement, religious thought and expression exploded throughout Western Europe. And in addition to claims of miracles, saints, and visitations from angels, many had nefarious interactions with demons and devils. It is from these accounts that some shocking images emerge. Satan was said to dwell far in the north where snow covered the landscape. He rode about on a sleigh pulled by reindeer and was clad in all red only to be set off by his enormous white beard. The Christians knew him as Ol’ Nick.Now if that doesn’t send creepy chills down your spin, I don’t now what will. END QUOTE - SANTA REALLY IS SATAN: Don't let those rosey cheeks fool you -

"Rare Exports; A Christmas Tale" is a 2010 Finnish fantasy film directed by Jalmari Helander about people living near the Korvatunturi mountain who discover the original Santa Claus. The film is based on a 2003 short film "Rare Exports Inc." by Jalmari and Juuso Helander.  the movie was based on research by it's writers into the original historical legends of "Ole Nic" in the earliest form eminating out of Finland.  The photo below is how the "original Santa" was portrayed by ancient Finnish sources. As you can see, he looks like the Devil.  Not only was his physical appearance consistant with a subconscious archtype of the Devil or Satan, he was also to be feared as being a "Child Predator" that kidnapped children and made them his personal possessions to be devoured.

The connections between the Devil and Santa Claus (Sinter Claes, Saint Nicholas) are pronounced. In addition to his association with the north and reindeer, the Devil can wear red fur; he is covered with soot and goes down chimney;s in the guise of Black Jack or the Black Man; He carries a large sack into which he pops sins or sinner (including naughty children); he carries a stick or cane to trash the guilty (the origin of the candy cane); he flies through the air with the help of animals; food and wine are left out for him as a bribe. The Devil’s nickname (!) of Old Nick derives directly from St. Nicholas. St. Nicholas was often associated with fertility cults, hence with fruit, nuts, and fruitcake, which are characteristic of his gifts.- Lucifer: The Devil in the Middle Ages. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1984, Russell, Jeffrey Burton.″, p. 71n17


Nicolaitans MIX the worship of God with worship of Satan and keep the truth "hidden" from the public through their ranks and orders of "secrecy" so the average person never knows they have been deceived into the worship of Satan, without even knowing it.  No better example of this consistent principle is found in how they incorporated SATAN right into the "Christian Church", complete with doting parents, who unwittingly  were placing the own children into the "lap of Satan" (played in imitation of an ancient heretic pedophile) as an occult Nicolaitan "offering"... TO SATAN.  (But these same people want you to call them "Christians" and "your brothers in the Christ!") What utter blasphemy.  Their "Christ" is nothing more than a "fireball" in the sky where they are all headed.

1Jn 2:4  He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 

If your minister is not willing to stand against this demonic "mixture" you can be certain you are sitting under the ministry of a Nicolaitan devil worshiper, even though he may be calling himself a "Baptist" or a "Presbyterian" or a "Quaker" or a "Charismatic" to the whole world and as "nice" and "sweet" on the outside, as sugar. He;s a liar and the truth is not in him.  And you are in great spiritual danger unless you leave and take as many souls with you on the way out the door as you possibly can.

Mat 12:31-32  
Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. 

These people need to be confronted publicly and openly for what they have done and are doing not only to you but the entire country, not excused and pacified.... For the sake of your own country, your own family and even your own salvation.   Repentance must come, with or without your preacher's permission or approval for it.  He will not be dying and going to hell for you, so don't let such a liar and a blasphemer tell you all the sin you can do (like him) and still go to heaven (because he is so deluded he thinks he will, despite doing this kind of filthy thing). Obey the commandment of Christ, and let God's grace take care of the rest.  But YOU obey.  

Blasphemy of the Spirit of God is the one of the most dangerous things that can be done, and that is precisely what these worthless Nicolaitan ministers are deceiving people into.  Including you if you do not personally repent of what he's done to you, and renounce it.  

You want to know why our kids are so screwed up in America these days? What do you think happens to children who have Satan and God mixed up in their souls (and can't tell the difference) because of the wicked deceit of Nicolaitan ministers who are "deluding you" spiritually in this manner? Of course their screwed up, and so are you. And you can thank all these no good filthy ungodly wicked whored out part-time devil worshipping Nicolaitan ministers for it.  It's got nothing to do with "liberals" and "atheists", it's your own minister for crying out loud.

Tell your minister you have repented,
And ask him to do the same. If he doesn't repent,  leave yesterday without negotiation.
The sooner you get out of there, the better off you will be.

You will be better off sitting on a couch on Sunday morning all by yourself, than sitting under one of these blasphemous "ministries".  They teach "doctrines of devils" and "minister" a seducing "spirit" to you, that they teach you to call "God", and it's nothing but Satan, and it turns you into a blasphemer too.  If you remain, you will be "drinking from the cup of damnation".  People who worship Satan and call it "Christ" do not go heaven. That's what Christ and his Apostles taught.   Those are the facts in the Scriptures.  All the professional excuse making by your Nicolaitan minister on earth, will not cut it on judgment day.  Get real and repent.

Rev 14:10  
The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God
which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; 
and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: 
And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, 

(This is describing you, if you do not leave)


Joh 8:44  Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, becausethere is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.


When we look back into history, past Santa Clause, past Saint Nicolas, and even past Odin for the very first mention of someone who


  (1) flies through the SKY,

  (2) with REINDEERS,

  (3) and a TREE,

  (4) and gifts,

  (5) And "sees" what you do?


we find the most amazing artifact which perhaps is at the root of the evolution of the entire tradition, via ROME. It is none other than NIMMUDI [Nimrod Himself], founder of the tower of Babel, on an engraving dated 2000 B.C. - Source, Alexander Hyslop, Two Babylons, P.47


The Original Santa Clause? 2000 BCE? Did Masonic illustrators introduce these symbols from their Templar Catholic tradition preserved from Rome, into the modern Icon?  

"...the Legend ascribes the origin of Masonry to the era of the building of the tower.  Nimrod is made the first Grand Masterand makes the first charge- that is, frames the first Constitution that the Masons ever had" - Dr. Albert Gallatin Mackey, pg.59, The History of Freemasonry

Or it just purely "accidental" because this is in REALITY the "SPIRIT" of CHRIST - MASS with its MASK OFF ? Is the real origin of the "SPIRIT OF CHRIST - MASS", really BABELISM? [BAAL WORSHIP]


Many have suspected the connection between Satan and Santa Clause simply because of the similarity of emphasis on teaching the willingness to tell religious LIES or believing in LIES in order to GET THINGS.  But the "connection" may in fact, be much more DIRECT, than many of them have imagined.  If the Icon's symbolisms were intentionally crafted into the illustrations as a result of Masonic influence from Bavarian illustrator Thomas Nast , as part of promoting the "Legend of the Craft" from NIMROD.  The connection to HA SATAN of the Bible, would in fact, be a DIRECT one.  Masons have a long history of promoting their "traditions" through building their symbolisms into social ICONS.  Including the American dollar bill and the architecture of our nation's capital. Washington D.C.




Gen 10:8  And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth.

Gen 10:10  And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel


Who was NIMROD?


Nîmrod, “Nimrod, strong, rebel.” - BARNES


Nimrod, the founder of the first imperial kingdom, …Nimrod means literally “we will revolt,” points to violent resistance to God… the figurative signification of a “hunter of men” (“trapper of men by stratagem and force,” Herder); …Became a tyrant, a powerful hunter of men. This course of life gave occasion to the proverb, “like Nimrod, a mighty hunter against the Lord,” which immortalized not his skill in hunting beasts, but the success of his hunting of men in the establishment of an imperial kingdom by tyranny and power. But if this be the meaning of the proverb, יהוה לפני “in the face of Jehovah” can only mean in defiance of Jehovah “And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel,” the well-known city of Babylon on the Euphrates, which from the time of Nimrod downwards has been the symbol of the power of the world in its hostility to God; - “and Erech” (Ὀρέχ, lxx),  - KEIL AND DELITZSCH


Nimrod comes from מרדmarad, he rebelled; and the Targum, on 1Ch_1:10, says: Nimrod began to be a mighty man in sin, a murderer of innocent men, and a rebel before the Lord. The Jerusalem Targum says: “He was mighty in hunting (or in prey) and in sin before God, for he was a hunter of the children of men in their languages; and he said unto them, Depart from the religion of Shem,[Ha Shem of Yehoshua] and cleave to the institutes of Nimrod.” The Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel says: “From the foundation of the world none was ever found like Nimrod, powerful in hunting, and in rebellions against the Lord.” The Syriac calls him a warlike giant. The word ציד  tsayid, which we render hunter, signifies prey; and is applied in the Scriptures to the hunting of men by persecution, oppression, and tyranny. Hence it is likely that Nimrod, having acquired power, used it in tyranny and oppression; and by rapine and violencefounded that domination which was the first distinguished by the name of a kingdom on the face of the earth. How many kingdoms have been founded in the same way, in various ages and nations from that time to the present! From the Nimrods of the earth, God deliver the world! Mr. Bryant, in his Mythology, considers Nimrod as the principal instrument of the idolatry…and treats him as an arch rebel and apostate. - CLARK





* A biblical "Type" means having the same "pattern" and "SPIRIT"!




(1) The GLOBAL LEADER of Rebellion Against God on earth.

(2) Demanded worship [i.e., Literally "to kiss"] Hebrew - shaw-khaw' A primitive root; to depress, that is, prostrate (especially reflexively in homage to royalty or God): - bow (self) down, crouch, fall down (flat), humbly beseech, do (make) obeisance, do reverence, make to stoop, worship. Greek -  proskuneō pros-koo-neh'-o From G4314 and probably a derivative of G2965 (meaning to kiss, like a dog licking his master’s hand); to fawn or crouch to, that is, (literally or figuratively) prostrate oneself in homage (do reverence to, adore): - worship.

(3) First to employed veneration of statuary [Idolatry]

(4) Original Founder of a singular global IMPERIAL RELIGION imposed through violence and force.

(5) Organized around the creation of a [STEEPLE TEMPLE]

(6) Used DECEIT & VIOLENCE to "hunt people" & "trap {trick} them".

(7) GLOBAL LEADER of REBELLION, and VIOLENCE against HA SHEM on the EARTH. [Founder Of anti-Semitism]




[Remember this is LITERALLY written to NIMROD-KING OF BABYON, the one who flies through the sky with Reindeer]


Isa 14:4  That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon,


Isa 14:8  Yea, the fir trees [CHRIST-MASS TREES!rejoice at thee... , saying, Since thou art laid down, no cutter is come up against us.  [See the section on THE TREE for details on the YALDA TREE mentioned here and in Jere.10!]


Isa 14:12  How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer [Shining One,i.e., Epiphany], son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

Isa 14:13  For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven [Fly]I will exalt my throne [Santa's Throne] above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north[The North Pole]

Isa 14:14  I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High[god-like]




Isa 14:15  Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

Isa 14:9  Hell from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming: it stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations.

Isa 14:11  Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, and the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee.





OLD SAINT NIC might be "Father [Papa, Pope] CHRIST- MASS" but he is also the FATHER OF LIES - Literally in history.  It is no "accident" that in order to observe him, you HAVE TO LIE too.     


To your own CHILD no less.


What is really amazing.... is that you would DO IT for him.... and still call yourself a follower of Christ? 


Obviously THE REAL CHRIST never told you to LIE TO YOUR CHILDREN , tell them to sit in NIMROD'S LAPand ask for "presents". Now did he?


Isa 14:13  ... I will ascend into heaven [Fly]I will exalt my throne [Throne] ... I will sit the sides of the north[The North Pole]

Isa 14:15  Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell


Isa 14:8  Yea, the fir trees [CHRIST-MASS TREES!rejoice at thee... , saying, Since thou art laid downno cutter is come up against us.




2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.  And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:





Dear Parent: Here is what THE SCRIPTURES says about lying to your Children 



Jer 50:36  A sword is upon the liars; ...and they shall be dismayed.


Psa 31:6  I have hated them that regard lying vanities:


Psa 31:18  Let the lying lips be put to silence;


Psa 52:3  Thou lovest evil more than good; and lying rather than to speak righteousness.


Psa 59:12  For the sin of their mouth and the words of their lips let them even be taken in their pride: and for cursing and lying which they speak.


Psa 119:29  Remove from me the way of lying:


Psa 119:163  I hate and abhor lying: but thy law do I love.


Psa 120:2  Deliver my soul, O LORD, from lying lips, and from a deceitful tongue.


Pro 6:16  These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:

Pro 6:17  A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,


Pro 12:19  The lip of truth shall be established for ever: but a lying tongue is but for a moment.


Pro 12:22  Lying lips are abomination to the LORD: but they that deal truly are his delight.


Pro 13:5  A righteous man hateth lying:


Jer 7:8  Behold, ye trust in lying words, that cannot profit.


Eze 13:7  Have ye not seen a vain vision, and have ye not spoken a lying divination, whereas ye say, The LORD saith it; albeit I have not spoken?


Eph 4:25  Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour:


Pro 21:6  The getting of treasures by a lying tongue is a vanity tossed to and fro of them that seek death.


Rev 21:8  … idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.


Jon 2:8  They that observe lying vanities forsake their own mercy.


Pro 14:12  There is a way which seemeth right unto a man,

but the end thereof are THE WAYS OF DEATH.

PS. Telling the fictional account of the “Nicolaitans” and their “Saint Nicolas” from Turkey, invented in 847 AD doesn’t make it any better EITHER.

In fact… you make it EVEN WORSE.  "Lying" in the name of an alleged SAINT!?! Really? What "spirit" would this be?


ROME has long practiced an ethic of RELIGIOUS DECIET for GAIN since it’s earliest days of fabricating phoney legal documents (1), destroying historical records (2), even inserting it's own interpolations into Scripture (3) and history books like Josephus (4) which have been publicly exposed by manuscript scholars and even FOOTNOTED IN YOUR BIBLE (5)Their leaders have openly taught to do so for their Church is a “virtue” (6).  Since this is the “true SPIRIT of CHRIST – MASS” it is not surprising that it seduces people who should know better into practicing A SPIRIT OF DECIET… against Children no less ...this "time of year".


The “Spirit of CHRIST – MASS” is nothing less than “a lying spirit”.  That is why Parents end up willing participants in “religious deception” at CHRIST - MASS, thinking it is “OK” as long as the children get “presents” at the end of the LIE.


Pro 21:6  The getting of treasures by a lying tongue is a vanity ... of them that seek death.


It is conditioningyour child to accept deceptionand erasing their natural intuitive instincts for spotting and exposing lies [a survival skill which serves to protect them well as adults].  Destroying this within your child could one day cost them their lives.


Aside from the fact, that this activity is literally called AN ABOMINATION to God, and practicing this behavior causes you to “forsake your own mercy”, you are EXTENDING a danger described in the SCRIPTURE as involving a potential for ETERNAL DAMNATION to YOUR CHILD!!!






is no different than the ONE that is MOLESTING THEM.

Click here to See => Child Molestation Among Rome's Clergy


NBC News: since the mid 80's the Roman Catholic church has paid  out over 1 billion dollars in lawsuits stemming from child  molestations by their priests. - Tom Brokaw 3/18/2002 [PS. It's more now]


(1) The  DONATION OF CONSTANTINE. An admittedly fraudulent legal document upon which the Roman Church laid claim to possession of all the kingdoms of Europe.

(2) See Inquisitions, Heresy Trials, and Index of Forbidden Books.

(3) INTERPOLATIONS - exposed in manuscript comparisons of the ancient texts of the New Testament found in different places.  All known interpolations are documented in the footnotes in most reference Bibles with the notation "Not found in the oldest manuscripts". Among these are Roman "doctrinal" insertions discounting Jewish law [John 7:53- 8:11], supporting its own view of the "Blessed Trinity" [1 John 5:7], and advocating bizarre Gnostic doctrines of gnosis syncretism with Serpent enlightenment found in the Nag Hammadi texts [Mark 16:8ff]

(4) Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews xviii 3.3, famous passage known as the Testimonium Flavianum describing Christ.  Modern scholars have identified the text as fraudulent.  Numerous variants of the text have been discovered which do not reflect Rome's doctored version.

(5) See New Testament Manuscripts; textual criticism and scholarship.

(6)  The Roman Church has had a long and rather blatant history of openly lying for the promotion of its Papacy. The concept of Lying to establish control over the masses have been also openly taught AND PRACTICED by the Roman Church since its inception [beginning with the DONATION OF CONSTANTINE]

John Chrysostom, Roman theologian, bishop of Constantinople,5th century : "Do you see the advantage of deceit? ...

For great is the value of deceit, provided it be not introduced with a mischievous intention. In fact action of this kind ought not to be called deceit, but rather a kind of good management, cleverness and skill, capable of finding out ways where resources fail, and making up for the defects of the mind ...

And often it is necessary to deceive, and to do the greatest benefits by means of this device, whereas he who has gone by a straight course has done great mischief to the person whom he has not deceived."
(Treatise On The Priesthood, Book 1).

Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556), Founder of the Jesuits:"We should always be disposed to believe that which appears to us to be white is really black, if the hierarchy of the church so decides."

THE CHRISTMAS LIE - It's Bigger Than You Think!