Q: We’re hearing a lot on the news, these days, about ‘Mardi Gras’ and LENT … enjoying earthly pleasures, before a season of denying the flesh! Should Christians celebrate ‘LENT?’
A: Many noted theologians and scholars, have been saying, for years, that the culture, has influenced the church; and that is why, we’re constantly hearing elements of the culture, associated with Christianity. [Note: Permit me to go on record as saying, I’m very much aware that some of my ministry colleagues teach this subject matter from the standpoint of it being a 40-day period of fasting and prayer before Easter.]
[However, when it comes to Lent] The sad state-of-mind, centers around all the misguided people who take the approach, that Lent is coming, and I need to indulge my flesh in all the pleasures of life, before I have to give it up for 40 days. Thus, we arrive for many, at the door called, Mardi Gras, where, in the streets of New Orleans, the day after, you’d find paved-asphalt riddled with blood splotches, broken bottles, cigarette butts laced with other drugs, used condoms, vomit, etc., and the list can go on-and-on.
For this group, the concentration isn’t on the coming celebration of Easter; it’s totally on satisfying my carnal desires, before ‘Lent,’ because, I’m going to have to be spiritual for a little while, before resuming, all the pleasures that life has to offer.
The Word of God calls them, ‘spiritually blinded,’ because they never spend quality time in the Bible, getting to know and developing a relationship, with the God of the Bible. Because, if they did, they would discover that Lent did not come from the Bible. Nowhere in sacred Scripture, did Jesus ever mention it, nor will you find where the Apostles or early church fathers celebrated it, as a time or celebration before the resurrection of Christ.
However, if you’re a serious student of sacred Scripture, and enjoy plowing through a little church history on the origin of celebrations that have found their way into Christ’s church, then you’d soon discover that in ancient paganism, it was believed that Tammuz (or Baal) was killed by a wild boar. And afterwards, his mother Semiramis, known as the high priestess of Babylonian paganism, mourned and cried for her son for 40 days: afterwards, he arose from the dead. Therefore, the 40-day concept of mourning and going without food and fasting, has absolutely nothing to do with Christ’s resurrection, but was imposed upon Christianity from the religions of Babylon.
As a matter of fact, Tammuz is only mentioned once in the Bible, in the book of Ezekiel. The prophet describes a vision he had, saying the Lord “brought me to the entrance of the north gate of the house of the LORD, and I saw women sitting there, mourning the god Tammuz.” Here, we see where God [Himself] calls the practice of “weeping for Tammuz” a despicable thing, happening at the gate of the temple in Jerusalem.
I want to encourage you to do the historical research on ‘mystery Babylon,’ and you’d discover that Semiramis conceived her son [Tammuz] by being implanted through a sunbeam – attempting to draw the parallel of the virgin birth of our Lord – conceiving a son without a human father. Also, you will discover that Lent came out of the Roman Catholic System, and was superimposed on Christianity. This is where you will find the ‘mother/child’ idolatrous doctrine called the “Queen of Heaven,” that’s found in the Bible twice in the Book of Jeremiah 7:18, and 44:17-25. The first Queen of Heaven was Semiramis, the high priestess of Babylonian cults.
Comments (2)
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Dr. Loretta Rich
Excellent Dr. Mike. Thank you for the truth about Lent and New Orleans’ Mardi Gras.
The flesh profiteth nothing. It is the Spirit that quickeneth.
(John 6:63)
PauL Moye
Thank you Dr. Mike for that informative epistle. As Bishop Green’s favorite term was ”You’d be surprised at the minds of the people” the Catholic church’s DNA has influenced. A friend of mine is bent on rejecting everything that denomination has taught that he even believes that the doctrine of ”original sin ‘ is false because he believes they birthed it as opposed to Paul who I believe originated it in Romans 5:19 ”By one man’s disobedience many were made sinners.” and Eph.2:3 ” we were by nature the children of wrath.”I think even the rap group ‘Naughty By Nature’ got it right. The other thought was that we are not sinners until we practice sin and that when we inherit the sin nature but until then we are basically innocent and that’s why infants and kids under the age of accountability can populate heaven if they die because they have no sin nature until they gain it through the practice of it. He doesn’t believe David’s Psalm 51 was talking about David having a sinful nature from birth but by being conceived in sin by an adulterous relationship his father Jesse had. I think the Catholics and the rap group ‘Naughty By Nature’ got it right this time. What think ye?