Sunday, November 8, 2009

The Demonization of Valentine's Day

Once Hoeh wrote an article condemning St. Valentine's Day in the March, 1966 Plain Truth. In this article he claimed that St. Valentine's Day (they said the same thing about Christmas) was derived from a cult centered upon Nimrod. He is pretty much imitating Hyslop.

Here he further elaborated on the Armstrongite Nimrod-Semiramis myth. Here he claims that Semiramis lusted after her newborn son when he was born on January 6 (Epiphany) and he was presented to the community on February 15, which includes the evening of February 14, hence we get St. Valentine's Day.
It is said that when Nimrod's mother saw him, she LUSTED after him -- she DESIRED him. [Who said this?] Nimrod became her Cupid -- her desired one -- and later her Valentine! So evil was Nimrod's mother that IT IS SAID SHE MARRIED HER OWN SON! Inscribed on the monuments of ancient Egypt are inscriptions that Nimrod (the Egyptians called him Osiris) was "the husband of his mother."
What memorials is Hoeh talking about? Is there any evidence to support an alternative viewpoint? Does that prove that Semiramis lusted after her son? No. I am starting to think he just made that part of the sickening story up. Just pulled it out of thin air to horrify and sicken trusting readers.

Observe what artful demonization this article employs to vilify Valentine's Day. The reader is told that this day actually refers to an incident of (desired) incest! Imagine some trusting reader who celebrated this day, who may even have some treasured memory associated with this day, and then to be told that this day honors a terrible tyrant, even a moment of incest.

The whole point of this article is to isolate the potential recruit. To make such a person reject a widespread practice of society thus isolating him from the rest of world and making that person more willing to cling to the 'geniuses' of Ambassador College, when really they are unknowing submitting themselves to HWA.

Just one point, earlier in the article Hoeh also stated this:
The ancient name of Rome, before it was rebuilt in 753 B.C., was Saturnia -- the site of Saturn's (Nimrod's) hiding. There he was found and slain for his crimes.
However as xHWA showed us earlier Saturnia was actually a town that got swallowed up into the expanding of Rome. Saturnia is not Rome! It was a town that got absorded into Rome.

3 comments:

  1. "The reader is told that this day actually refers to an incident of (desired) incest!"

    "Just pulled it out of thin air to horrify and sicken trusting readers."

    I don't believe that Armstrong followers are sickened by incest. They seem to accept the fact that Herbert had a problem, but they always are found using the "David defense."

    No, incest does not bother the Armstrongist. They must always defend this corrupt man that is still honored as an apostle. What is the alternative? Admit that their religion was but a waste of their life.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "but they always are found using the 'David defense.'"

    You've experienced that too?
    I can attest to kscribe's comment. I have seen this many times!

    "They must always defend this corrupt man that is still honored as an apostle. What is the alternative? Admit that their religion was but a waste of their life."

    I completely agree!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I decided several years ago to not take chances when it comes to February 14. I try not to love anyone that day.

    It's a COG article waiting to happen. "God is love -- but He opposes love on February 14. WHY?"

    ReplyDelete