ChristMasIsALie.com

The world has much more information available to it today, than it ever has had before. It is possible to trace the geographical history of a person's ancestry through something known as "genetics". Even if they have had no clue where their ancestry came from. "Genetic markers" reveal the past. And you cannot "escape" from them. You cannot "spin-doctor" them away. They are what they are.

They "reproduce" the same symbols, signs, ideas and behaviors throughout history. There are "genetic markers" with these "emotive and conceptual and spiritual" things, just like there is found in biology.

The "family mythology" is that the "Nicolaitans" were "wife-swapping" adulterers and they went "extinct", and no longer exist. End of story. But that explanation comes from suspicious sources and outright contradicts the information in the New Testament. In fact, that claim is precisely "the opposite"? What would "account" for this very very very strange "contradiction" ???

In using "Genetics" as an illustration of how historic "traits" are passed down through time and dispersed to groups of ideologically similar or influenced descendants, the concept of "haplotypes" can be used to understand what makes up all the parts of what we are calling a "genetic marker". These are individual strands in a "Chromosome" made up of different combinations of "parts". Certain "Haplotypes" are common to certain geographical regions and allow "genetic researchers" to discover the actual "history" of a person's biology, regardless of the "family mythology" about where they have have come from.

Haplotype #1 - Veneration of the actual name "Nicolas"/"Nicholas"/"Nikolas"

The name beginning with the first marker, may seem like a small matter, but it bears more historical weight than most realize.  The reason is that parents name their children with names that are venerated, and considered admirable.

For example, many people are aware of World War II, and the historical figures of that conflict. Most people would not name their child after "Hitler", unless of course, they "admired" him. Thus indicating they viewed Nazi-ism in a "favorable" light. The use and veneration of the name itself, would indicate an ideological connection. Otherwise, the name would not be used.

In the New Testament, which reflected authentic "early Christianity", there were "names" which were "villainized", and names which were "idealized" . A community "influenced" by this literature, would naturally reflect those perspectives or views. For example, no one influenced by New Testament literature, would name their child "Judas", or their twins "Ananias and Sapphira", or their daughter "Jezebel". Those are names of infamy, in New Testament literature. On the other hand, you might expect to see a large number named "John", or "Peter" or "James" or "Deborah" or "Hanna", etc.

One name you would not expect to see frequently would be "Nicolas"/"Nicholas". Why is that? In New Testament literature, the only time that name is mentioned is an extremely negative way. It is the name of a founder of one of the most "villainized" religious movements in Biblical history. It would be as odd to name your child "Judas" or "Jezebel" as it would be to name your child "Nicholas" (in terms of the New Testament perspective, historically). 

But on the other hand, among the actual historically influenced communities of  "Nicolaitans", the name "Nicolas" would be indisputably held in the very highest esteem. (A complete contrast as to how it would be seen among the religious communities associated with the New Testament culture)

The name "Nicolas" itself, is part of the first "genetic marker" (or "haplotype-1")

While the first "haplotype" is the use of the name itself, the second "haplotype" would be what the name "venerates" or "associates" itself with. The meaning of the name. If a name means "stupid one", it is less likely to be chosen by parents. If it refers to something intrinsically objectionable, it is less likely to be used as a name for newborn babies by their mothers.  So what can be learned from the name itself?

Haplotype #2 - Veneration of Authoritarianism

The name "Nicolas" is used only 1 time in the entire Bible. The "followers" of "Nicolas" were named by John after him and called "Nicolaitans".  This kind of designation is not unusual historically. "Lutherans" are called "Lutherans" because they "followed" Martin Luther. Wesleyans were called "Wesleyans" because they followed John Wesley.  Likewise, "Nicolaitans" were followers of "Nicolas".

"Nicolas of Antioch" was a "gentile convert". His name is a "gentile name", thus why it is not found anywhere else in the Scriptures (Old or New).  When "Nicolas's" mother gave him that name, she was wanting to give him a name that was "virtuous" and "admirable" in gentile Greco-Roman culture. So the meaning and association of the name in Gentile culture, would be important to understand. What was being "venerated"? The name "Nicolas"/"Nicholas" means "victorious over the people" by means of "conquest", or "force". It is a reference to the very well known "gentile" admiration for "authoritarianism".

So we can see this would be a very odd/unusual/contradictory trait to "venerate" among communities influenced by New Testament literature in the tradition of Christ and the Apostles.

Haplotype #3 - Veneration of "Nike" Spirits

Because the name "Nik-o-las" is taken from the name "Nike" (for victory), it is clear that among the gentile "Nik-o-laitans", the "Nike" spirits from which the name was actually derived, would also be a point of "veneration".

New Testament communities considered these "spirits" to be "demonic spirits", so they would have no reason to be "decorating" their houses or buildings of worship with them, at any given time of the year.

Haplotype #4 - Origins in the city of Antioch

Whatever "Nicolaitanism" was or was not, one thing on which there was consensus,  both from the New Testament, and later sources, the founder of the movement had originated from Antioch. But as the New Testament progresses, we also see it's "Journey" through New Testament Apostolic communities, which interact with it, and in those references, more information is given about it's characteristics.

So in essence, "Nicolaitanism" was like a "virus" (theology), that emerged into the ancient Mediterranean world, from the "gentile" native of the city of Antioch. It was a theological  perspective, that had particular appeal to "gentiles" in the Roman empire.  It was a "rival" interpretation of "Christ" based on gentile Roman paganism. 

But because it was rejected by the real "Apostles", it had to use "pretense" and "deception", in order to gain "validity" and access to these New Testament (initially Jewish) communities.

CONCLUSION:

We have 4 identifying "Haplotypes" in GENETIC MARKER #1.  These are (1) Veneration and use of the name NICOLAS/NICHOLAS/NIKOLAS.  (2) Authoritarianism (3) Nike "spirits" (4) Origin in Antioch.

Next we will examine GENETIC MARKER #2.

1Jn 2:18 

Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there *many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

Haplotype #3 - Concentrated in the City of Ephesus

The city of Ephesus is the site of the first encounter with the "Nicolaitans" in the New Testament, outside the cities of Antioch, which was the city of "Nicolas's" origin and Jerusalem, where he was "converted" and for a short time, served as a "deacon".

CONCLUSION: 

That concludes the Haplotyes for GENETIC MARKER #2.  (1) Denial of the "Flesh of Christ" in the PASSOVER MEAL (2) Spread to the city of Ephesus.

Rev 2:2,6 

I know ...thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars: But ...thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

Both "Celibacy" and "Pederasty" were common customs in Roman religious culture. "Nicolaitans" were "assimilating" all things ROMAN in their "replacement" of the genuine New Testament Apostles (who were still "Jewish" in their "religious orientation)

RESULTS:

BIBLICAL “DNA” RECORD OF “NICOLAITANISM”

(4 UNMISTAKABLE “GENETIC” MARKERS)

GENETIC MARKER #1 – Naming Convention & Origins

1. Veneration and use of the name “Nicolas/Nicholas/Nikolas”

2. Veneration of Authoritarianism

3. Veneration of “Nike” Spirits

4. Originated in the city of Antioch

GENETIC MARKER #2 – Ecclesiology and Demographics

1. Denial of the FLESH OF CHRIST (in the PASSOVER MEAL)

2. Are the “majority” (but are the "wrong" religion)

3. Concentrated in the city of EPHESUS

GENETIC MARKER #3 – Ecclesiastical Claims and Ethics

1.  Claim to be the TRUE “Christian”  (But are it's "replacement")

2.  Claim to be the ORIGINAL “Apostles” (But are Romans)

3.  Employ Intentional Religious Deceit 

GENETIC MARKER #4 – Sexual Practices and Theology

1. Practice Roman Celibacy

2. Practice Roman Pedophilia

3. Participate in Roman (pagan) Feasts

4. Hold a "doctrine" of  "assimilating" Roman SUN WORSHIP

"John, the disciple of the Lord, preaches this faith, 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"

- Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 11

"This festival (Christmas) was invented as some say, by the

disciples of the heretic Cerinthus; and was accepted by the Greek,

because they were truly fond of festivals and most fervent in

piety; and by them it was spread and diffused all over the world"

- Ananias of Hirak, On Christmas, the Expositor, 5th Series, Vol.4 (1896) Translation, pg.323-337. The discourse of Ananias, called the Counter upon the Epiphany of our Lord and Savior.

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, in a civil manner, request not to participate ,without reprisals, violence and hatred.  

But this isn't really written to persuade or address these groups and their 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 either the good (or damned) of their own,  have infiltrated America's historically Evangelical/Protestant/Christian communities and deceived others, often through the clergy in the pulpits operating as impostures, this research has been collected.  Not to offend the happy (and damned) deceivers, but to call the unfortunately deceived (and damned), 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 everyone else, forced to live with it.  

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 the TRUE "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 residual rotten corpse material from their personages,  when touched, did something miraculous, depending on whatever the Vatican mythologists handling the PR of their "Sainthood", imagine. 

The frequent divorces from reality, that must be employed are never bothersome, as they are happily offered as spiritual duty to the Roman Empire, and it's lord god, the Pope, or it's Masonic worshipful master.  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, as adults.

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 flattering 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 those 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 is already screaming at us inside.  And this is what Liars must drowned out with 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 was a liar, just like his spiritual 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. [1 Tim.3:2]

(2) 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 actually pray to, and even worship as God? In violation of both the first and greatest commandment of God? No, of course not. [Ex.34:14]

But this impostor certainly did, and still does.

 (3) And do "real saints" seduce and victimized children, in order to sexually exploit and abuse them, and in particular, use vulnerable heart-broken orphans, in order to indulge the Roman customary practices of pederasty and pedophilia to satisfy  personal appetites for aberrant sexual lusts, with 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 that practice in the Roman Catholic Church, where it has remained a shamefully permanent and despicable hidden institution & sanctioned practice, up into our very own modern 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, rumors, “pious lies” or myths, but from the most reliable documents known in Christendom still to this day.

John 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, 

MULTIPLYING ENTITIES

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 a comical denial (that has been invoked since the iconoclast wars of 847 A.D.)

The "Doctrine" of the Nicholaitans was the syncretistic "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 "Nicolaitans", 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 syncretism 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 "Nicolaitans", and that they "disappeared" 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 "Nicolas", 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.  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. 

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 apparent. "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 today's 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 apparent 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",  for "authority" of contrarian religious leadership" [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.

These are the facts that anyone who accepts the record of the New Testament "must admit" too.  There are 14 rather important facts.   What do you see?

WHAT IS CONTAINED IN THESE 14 POINTS?

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 pedophilia.

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. 

See the video series: "Antichrist For Dummies", for more informaiton

Contrary To What You've Been Told

SAINT NICHOLAS WAS NO SAINT

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 Nicolaitan doctrine work very hard at creating plausible denials.  These DENIALS  are transparent in that the identity of the "Nicolaitans" 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 Nicolaitans" 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 exonerated 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 this man Pope with the name of 3 sixes, fully knowing the prophecy, and fully knowing his name fulfilled that prophecy.  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 Pachomius 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 very biased thus 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.

WHY IT HAPPENED...

(1) 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". 

(2) 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. 

(3) 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. 

(4) 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. 

(5) 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 and thereby effectively "distance" himself from their identity

SAINT NICOLAS

OF MYRA, or EPHESUS, or PERGAMOS, or BEIT JALA,

or SAMARIA, or ANTIOCH

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;

QUOTE: "Up to the present the life of this distinguished Shepherd has been unknown to the majority of the faithful".  END QUOTE

- St. Methodius, Roman Patriarch of Constantinople, 847 AD

They were "unkown", because his accounts were fabricated at that time in history, to "replace" what existed BEFORE that time, because of "The Iconoclast Wars".

The "Iconoclast Wars" were a series of "civil wars" over the worship of "images".  That activity was associated with a "prophecy" concerning "the antichrist" (thus the "wars" generated over it).

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: Assimilate both. (Reconcile through a "fictional history")

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 the Nicolaitans.

The Vatican and Greek Orthodox religious leaders "deny the connection" and "point to as proof" the known virtually admitted 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.

"WHERE DRESSING UP AS SAINT NICHOLAS AND GIVING OUT PRESENTS TO CHILDREN" DURING SATURNALIA CAME FROM

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 the actual "path of Christ".  The actual original city of Jerusalem (including it's actual path) was (in reality) pulverized into rubble, and buried hopelessly several feet below, the "make-believe" route, "sold" to modern tourists, today.

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.  

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.

 - Oldest Christian Church, Xinhuanet.com

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. 

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.  [Act_8:3; Rom_16:5; 1Co_16:19; Col_4:15; 1T_3:5; 1Ti_3:15; Phm_1:2]

ARCHEOLOGY itself, has confirmed this practice continued well into the 4th century, as several "Christian homes" have been "discovered" showing graffiti and art work indicating  or even displaying domestic "Christian" worship practices.

So there had been "a divergence" between two different "practices". One revolving around the "home", and the "other" (opposite) focusing on "assimilation of pagan temples", showing "Christ" to be "interpreted as the sun". This was the religious practice of NICOLAITANISM (Now confirmed by ARCHEOLOGY itself). [Rev.2:6,15]

In contrast to the New Testament "domestic" practice, Mithraic practices (i.e., 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"

And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

"Show me your friends,

and I will tell you who you are"

- Folk Proverb

The "companions" of "Saint Nicholas" never made it "across the pond" to America, in pop-culture rituals, because, when the "veneration" of "Saint Nichaolas" was first being promoted along with "Christmas" in the U.S., it was still the 1800s, and the 'Psuedo-Christoi" which were promiting it, realized that was a "bridge too far". 

Although today, they are seeking to make up for lost time, and now, actively promoting the re-enactment of his various "companions". (All of which are various forms of "demonic" characters.

Why exactly "a saint" would be celebrated by compulsive lying and accompanied by flocks of "demons", is never really explained by anyone, (as though such explanations would be completely unecessary), but they never are.

The "nature" and "manner" in which this alleged "Saint" is "celebrated" speaks to the "nature" or "spirit" of what this alleged "Saint", really actually is.  You can make all the false claims you wish to make about it, but at the end of the day, it is an entity, that brings with it, "demonic spirits".

For a "spirit" that is so "concerned for children" it is quite an "opposite" to have as it's "attendant spirits", "demons" whose job is to come into your home, "with Saint Nicolas", and "kill" any and all "children", that are deficiently "Roman Catholic". 

That really doesn't sound much like the "spirit" of someone that cares too much for "children".  The fact, that has to actually be pointed out, to anyone at all, is an amazing thing on it's own.  But it actually does.  Such is the "addiction" to "Christmas", that many who have been victimized by this deception, now suffer, from.  But like most "addictions", the "addict" does not want to be spared from the "addiction", even if it means they are injured, diminished or even even killed. But for many, that is precisely what it is. And like most "addictions", they could not "stop", even if, they wanted to.

No where in the New Testament does Christ ever make threatening comments to, or about "Children", no matter how "good or bad" they may have been. In fact, quite the opposite occurs. He states theirs is the kingdom of "Heaven". (catagorically)

So it would be quite "impossible" for a "Saints" who shares his "spirit" to have any other opinion as well. But "Saint Nichaols" was "no saint", as evidenced by his "attendant spirits", who are literally "demons".

More about the affect of all this is discussed in "The Christmas Magic" and in the next section following it,"The Christmas Spirit".

Below are samplings from  twelve (12) articles (listed in alphabetical order) on "Krampus" explaining it's ancient origins, practice and popularity all across Europe. These articles range from Britannica, Smithsonian, National Geographic to popular sources such as Wikipedia.

After you view the highlighted sections of the articles, you will be shown the summary of what the narrative "is" that they form by consensus.

The "black hole of history" is how "Nicolaitanism" became the "State Religion" of the Romn empire, because the unflattering details of how that happend were intentionally "purged" from "records" and "covered-up" in the production of intentionally false historical "narratives". And... it is surfacing again, in the "narrative" concerning "Krampus".  After the articles, you will be shown how.

Not only did this (never canonized Saint) have his own "Saint day", there were a whole calendar of "events" to "celebrate and venerate" his latest "incarnation" as "Nicholas of Myra". One of the many "events",  held annually, in addition to the re-enactment of his "visit", was the "Nicolas-play" called the "Nikolausspiel" (in German).

These "plays" were an outgrowth of what was called "the Mystery plays" from the middle-ages in Europe. The "Mystery plays" were so called because they were sponsoed by the local "guilds" (out of which grew "the Masons"). In their "pre-Masonic" form, the "guilds" themselves were called "the Mysteries". The "Masons" grew out of "the guilds" of the middle-ages.

Freemasonry is a fraternal organisation which developed out of guilds of actual, working stonemasons (known as ‘operative masons’) in the Middle Ages.

- https://www.history.co.uk/shows/lost-relics-of-the-knights-templar/articles/the-templar-freemason-connection#:~:text=Freemasonry%20is%20a%20fraternal%20organisation,')%20in%20the%20Middle%20Ages

Since the plays were "sponsored" by them, the plays came to be known as a "Mystery play", and within it's "drama", actors would "act out" the "mysteries of God", sometimes from "creation" all the way to the "final judgment".  This actually was the same "origin", as the origin of the birth of the European "Christmas Tree", which had served as Adam & Eve's "Tree of knowledge" in the play.

The "Nikolausspiel" is actually being "exported" to countries across the world, along with the "Krampus" demon, as an acompanying celebratory event for the current [New World Order], observance of "Christmas". See "Nikolausspiel"

Eventually, the mystery plays were banned in most areas during the Reformation, but it is conceivable that some form of the tradition survived in the predominately Catholic regions of Austria and Bavaria to eventually give birth to the traditional Nikolausspiel (i.e. “Nicholas Play”) featuring Krampus. Ironically, nearly every article about Krampus on the internet mentions his resemblance to the Devil, but yet they all insist that Krampus is not the Devil, but rather a being from pre-Christian pagan mythology—despite the fact that he is almost exactly identical to the medieval Devil. It baffles me that seemingly everyone keeps trying to tie the traditional Austrian and Bavarian Nikolausspiel featuring Krampus to ancient pre-Christian Germanic paganism and yet no one seems to be willing to admit that it is, in all likelihood, actually ultimately derived from the at least nominally Christian mystery plays of the Late Middle Ages. 

-https://talesoftimesforgotten.com/2019/12/13/is-krampus-really-pagan/