Ronald Weinland

Most people in traditional Christianity know that Judaism rejected Joshua as being the Messiah. What they don’t realize is the devastating consequences of what Judaism did after that rejection. Because this is not understood or grasped, Christianity itself now stands in a precarious place.

It was one thing for Judaism to reject Joshua as being sent from God. But it became an even more serious matter when they also rejected God Himself by refusing and changing His instructions about when and how to observe His “appointed time” of Passover. They had observed it faithfully for several hundred years, but their hatred for Joshua ran so deep that they were willing to turn against what God had given them.

Now ask yourself: Could something like this ever happen within Christianity? The unsettling truth is that it already has—and what happened in Christianity was actually far worse. While the first phase of this cover-up began in Judaism, it was the second phase—carried out in traditional Christianity—that became even more destructive and far-reaching.

This next phase didn’t just distort the identity of the Messiah; it buried the truth about Him under centuries of misunderstanding, misinterpretation, and religious tradition. And that’s what this chapter will begin to uncover.

Laying the Groundwork for a Deception: Persecution Begins
Even after Christ had been killed, the hatred toward Him didn’t stop—it only increased over time. The leaders of Judaism spread their propaganda of false accusations, allegations of blasphemous teachings, and their contempt against those in God’s Church—those who followed His teachings. Their hostility was not only aimed at Christ during His life but extended forcefully to His followers after His resurrection.

The events that followed over the next 290 years, although somewhat gradual, led to far greater oppression and discrimination against God’s people. These events paved the way for the second phase of the great cover-up that would take hold within traditional Christianity.

The roots of this unimaginable cover-up can be traced back to the persecution that Judaism inflicted first upon Christ and then upon God’s Church.

Before His death, nearly every religious leader in Judaism was focused on discrediting Joshua. They attacked His teachings, sought to trap Him in His words, and tried to turn the people against Him. After His death, their attacks simply shifted to the early Church, targeting those who dared to teach what Joshua had taught.

Fueled by jealousies and fear, these leaders believed their power and influence were under threat. They saw the teachings about Christ as a direct challenge to their own authority and traditions. In opposing Him, they had already placed themselves in the dangerous position of resisting God’s own Son. Yet even after His death, they continued their opposition by persecuting God’s own Church.

Even though Joshua was now dead, these leaders weren’t satisfied. They feared His movement might still grow, that His disciples might spread His teachings, and that people might come to believe He had risen from the dead—just as He had said He would. They began to take preemptive measures to stop any teachings or potential following of Christ that might continue after His death.

Securing the Tomb: The First Cover-up Attempt
An account given by Matthew reveals how quickly these leaders of Judaism were already working to protect their own reputations and religious standing among the Jewish people. This account begins after Joseph had gone to Pilate to take possession of Joshua’s body:

“When Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth and laid it in his new tomb which he had hewn out of the rock. Then he rolled a large stone against the entrance of the tomb and departed. Now Mary Magdalene was there, and the other Mary, sitting opposite the tomb. On the next day, which followed the preparation day, the chief priests and Pharisees gathered before Pilate, saying, ‘Sir, we remember, while He was still alive, how that deceiver said, “After three days I will rise.” Therefore, command that the tomb be made secure unto the third day, unless His disciples come by night and steal Him, and say to the people, “He has risen from the dead.” So the last deception will be worse than the first.’ Pilate said to them, “You may have a guard. Go your way, make it as secure as you know how.” So they went and made the tomb secure, sealing the stone and setting the guard” (Matthew 27:59-66).

So even after Christ’s death, the Jewish leaders remained afraid that people would continue to follow Him and embrace His teachings. Determined to prevent that, they took steps to suppress any possibility that His influence would continue to spread.

One part of their effort was to ensure that Christ’s body remained in the tomb, hoping to stop any rumors or belief in a resurrection. But their plan failed—not because someone stole the body, but because God resurrected Him from the dead.

According to the story, when the women arrived early on Sunday morning, the tomb was already empty. An angel was sitting upon the stone that had been rolled away from the tomb’s entrance. He informed them that Christ had already risen from the dead, explaining that He was no longer there and inviting them to look inside to see where His body had been lying.

The Ultimate Rejection
The hatred and envy toward Christ and His teachings did not end when He had been placed in the tomb after His death. After His body was not found in the tomb, that hatred became even greater. What followed was a turning point. The religious leaders could not allow people to believe that Joshua had risen, so they worked quickly to discredit any such idea. Their fear and envy led them to take drastic action.

Although they had diligently observed the correct timing of Passover for hundreds of years, they were eventually willing to change that timing. They did so in an effort to mask the truth and eliminate any possibility that Joshua might indeed be seen as the Passover Lamb of God.

This wasn’t just a rejection of Christ—it was a rejection of God’s own commanded observances. They chose tradition and self-preservation over obedience to God. And the persecution of Christ’s followers didn’t end with His death—it only grew more intense.

God’s Church is Born and Persecution Begins
After His resurrection, Joshua remained for forty days teaching His disciples. From these disciples, twelve were chosen to serve as apostles. Then, as foretold, Joshua ascended into heaven. He would not return again until the time came for Him to fulfill His second role: to reign as King in God’s Kingdom. His first coming had fulfilled the role of the Passover Lamb—the Passover for all mankind. His second would fulfill the role of Messiah—God’s anointed King over all the earth.

Ten days after Christ departed and ascended into heaven there was another annual Holy Day to be observed known as Pentecost. Joshua had told His disciples to remain in Jerusalem for that observance. It was then that a powerful moment in God’s plan unfolded: He began to pour out His holy spirit upon mankind—upon those who would constitute His new Church.

This is when the Church of God began, and from this point the twelve apostles began teaching about the good news (often referred to as “gospel”)—that Joshua was indeed the Christ, the promised Messiah. He had fulfilled the Passover and had been resurrected from the dead. The apostles also taught the very truths Joshua had shared with them.

But their message came with consequences. As the apostles performed miracles and healed the sick, public attention grew. And with it, opposition from the religious establishment. The same spirit that had driven the leaders of Judaism to oppose Joshua now turned against His followers. Then, just after Pentecost, persecution began.

“Then the high priest rose up, and all those who were with him, which is the sect of the Sadducees, and they were filled with indignation, and laid their hands on the apostles and put them in the common prison” (Acts 5:17-18).

Opposition escalated rapidly, leading to increasing and ongoing persecution of the Church of God. The leaders of Judaism moved to destroy the Church that was spreading what they considered a dangerous message. Imprisonments, beatings, and executions followed.

Certain individuals were sent out to arrest members of the Church, imprison them, punish them, and in many cases, have them killed. Saul, who later became Paul, was one such individual. One of the first to be put to death, as recorded in the Book of Acts, was Stephen—a faithful disciple that spread the gospel of Christ. Saul was actually the one responsible for Stephen’s death by giving individuals permission to stone him.

But about a year after this account, everything changed when Saul himself was struck down on the road to Damascus and called by Christ. He was converted and later baptized. His conversion transformed him from one of the Church’s greatest enemies into one of its greatest champions. Paul later became an apostle, specifically sent to preach the good news to the Gentile world (those who were not Jewish).

While Paul began raising up churches across Gentile regions, the twelve apostles mainly remained in Jerusalem, ministering primarily to the Jewish people who were being drawn into God’s Church.

However, the persecution never truly stopped. Just thirteen years after the Church’s beginning, James—one of the twelve—was the first apostle to be put to death. He was executed by order of King Herod Agrippa. While Herod made the decree, many believe the accusations brought before him came from the leaders of Judaism.

The foundation of God’s Church had been laid—but it would be built in the midst of constant opposition, suffering, and bloodshed.

A Different Gospel Emerges: Truth Begins to be Distorted
Not long after Paul began preaching to the Gentiles, he noticed something troubling. He recorded a disturbing account of something that was happening in the Church. Within the early Church itself, some were already drifting away from the truth. What he witnessed marked the beginning of a gradual but dangerous shift—one that would eventually lead to the massive cover-up of truth in the centuries that followed.

“I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel [good news], of which there is not another. But there are some who trouble you and would pervert the good news of Christ” (Galatians 1:6-7).

Already, individuals were twisting the message of Christ, turning away from and distorting what the apostles had taught. This was only the beginning of people abandoning the truth that they had received within God’s Church. Many of those who left the truth went on to teach variations of it, mixing the gospel with their own ideas. These later became known as antichrists—those who opposed or misrepresented Christ.

Paul’s usual practice when visiting Gentile areas was to first teach in synagogues. Both Jews and members of God’s Church would gather there for weekly Sabbath services. This often caused tension, leading some Jewish attendees to become hostile toward Paul and those of the Church.

As the Church grew more established, its gatherings began to move to other places, including members’ homes. Despite this growth, persecution of God’s people intensified over time. Initially, this opposition came from within Judaism, but it soon expanded to include those who worshipped other gods in the regions Paul visited. Many of these opponents actively sought to harm or even kill Paul and his followers.

It can be hard to understand how so many people were continually stirred up with such hatred toward God’s teachers and His people.

Some in the Church, facing intense pressure and persecution from the Jewish community, the Gentiles, and even their own families, gradually began to weaken in their convictions. They started to adopt other religious ideas—often blended with elements of Judaism—which made their beliefs more acceptable to the Jewish community. In many cases, these compromises were influenced by family or friends who had been offended by their beliefs about Joshua from the beginning.

A similar pattern occurred among those more closely connected to Gentile relatives and friends who worshiped other gods. In some cases, these outside influences proved stronger than their commitment to the teachings they had received from the apostles. Many who left the Church began combining elements of pagan worship with their own altered views of God and Christ—creating a dangerous mixture of truth and error.

This blend of truth and error gave birth to a new kind of movement: offshoots of the Church that claimed to represent Christ but no longer held to the teachings of the apostles. Confusion began to take root. These new groups called themselves Christian, but what they taught was different. They altered the gospel message, reshaped doctrines, and introduced customs foreign to God’s Word. Confusion about Christianity began to spread as people who appointed themselves preachers and priests started teaching and promoting altered versions of the truth throughout the Roman world.

Paul confronted this corruption head-on. He warned the Church about specific individuals who had once been ministers but were now leading others astray. He named them and called out their false teachings. He did this to protect the Church because these ministers had been diluting and changing the teachings they had originally received.

Sadly, the danger wasn’t just external anymore. From within the Church itself, false teachers emerged, blending the truth with rituals of false gods and various traditions of the world. And in the vast Roman Empire, these distorted versions of Christianity began gaining popularity and power. The foundations of the great religious deception were being laid.

Rome Intervenes: Paul, Nero, and the Great Fire of Rome
For 35 years, God’s Church had endured relentless persecution from Jewish leaders. But that era was coming to a close—and in a surprising twist, the very forces that once oppressed the Church would soon become the oppressed themselves.

The shift began when the Jewish people began to rebel against the Roman rule. However, about six years before the rebellion fully took hold, Jewish leaders achieved what they saw as a major victory: They stirred up violent opposition against Paul during one of his visits to Jerusalem.

Intent on killing him, they sparked such unrest that Roman authorities had to intervene. When the situation escalated, Paul revealed his Roman citizenship—a strategic move that gave him the right to appeal his case directly to Caesar. This prevented his execution in Jerusalem, and led to his transfer to Rome, where he spent two years under house arrest. After being released, Paul continued his ministry for a few more years, traveling again through the Gentile regions where he had previously helped establish churches.

Then, in AD 64, soon after Paul’s release, disaster struck Rome. A massive fire broke out—the Great Fire of Rome—and raged for six days. Historical events of what actually happened were never settled. Who started it remains a mystery, but many believed that Emperor Nero himself gave the order to some of his men to set the fires. The reasons why he may have chosen to do so are irrelevant here, but what followed is more pertinent.

As the rumors concerning Nero spread, the Roman government responded by claiming the Jews had caused the fires. This theory rapidly gained in popularity. Some have postulated that even the followers of Christ were being blamed.

Regardless, it is clear that hostility and resentment toward Judaism and the Jewish people were growing throughout the Roman Empire. Both Jews and Christians were persecuted vigorously. Because Christians still kept many observances that appeared similar to Jewish customs—such as keeping a form of Passover and observing the weekly Sabbath and annual Holy Days—those in God’s Church were easily lumped together with the Jews in the eyes of the Roman authorities.

The oppression had become so intense that the Jews began to push back, speaking out more boldly in their opposition to the Roman government. This mounting pressure set the stage for what became known as the First Jewish Revolt in AD 66. The Roman Empire responded with brutal force.

It was during this same period of AD 66-67, that Paul was arrested once more and returned to Rome. This time he would not be in house confinement and there would be no release. Instead, he was imprisoned and ultimately beheaded.

As mentioned earlier, the most devastating blow to Judaism occurred in AD 70. This took place one year after Vespasian began to rule in the Roman Empire. His son Titus led a Roman military campaign that crushed the Jewish rebellion. Jerusalem was captured, and the Temple was completely destroyed. With the fall of the Temple and the heart of Jewish religious authority in ruins, the persecution of God’s Church by Judaism finally came to an end.

But although one form of persecution faded, another threat was already beginning to rise.

Rome Becomes the New Persecutor
As the Jewish-Roman War uprooted Judaism from Jerusalem and scattered much of the Jewish population throughout the region, their persecution of the Church came to an end.

But persecution didn’t stop. It simply changed hands.

Since many of the practices of the Church of God appeared so similar to that of the Jews, persecution upon the Church then began to come from the Roman Empire itself. They shifted their aggression toward the Church, seeing it as just another branch of the already-despised Jewish faith.

By AD 95, John was the last remaining apostle. That year, he was exiled to the remote Isle of Patmos in the Aegean Sea, where he received and recorded the Book of Revelation. Emperor Domitian—who ruled from AD 81 to 96—was responsible for John’s exile as his bold preaching was viewed as a threat to Roman authority over religious beliefs for the empire. Domitian was the son of Vespasian and younger brother of Titus, both of whom played major roles in suppressing Jewish uprisings.

According to Church tradition and various writings, the persecution during this time was so intense that all the remaining apostles had been killed—except for John, who is believed to be the only one to have died of old age.

One striking legacy of this area remains standing in Rome to this day—the Colosseum. It was constructed between AD 70 and 80 under the Roman Emperors Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian. Although many people are unaware of it, the Colosseum was built using enslaved Jews from Judaea and funded with the treasure taken by Titus during his conquest of Jerusalem in AD 70.

The Roman Empire may have silenced Judaism’s opposition to the Church, but it replaced it with a far greater, more enduring threat—one that would soon give rise to a counterfeit form of Christianity itself.

Persecution and the Rise of a Counterfeit Faith
After John wrote the final book of the New Testament—the Book of Revelation—near the end of the first century AD, the next two centuries became some of the most turbulent in the history of God’s Church. Persecution intensified, and this time, it was coming directly from the Roman Empire.

After Christ’s resurrection, ideas about Him and His teachings began to spread throughout the Roman-dominated world. Some priests and teachers of other deities found these stories appealing and adopted them, using elements of the truth about God and His Son to promote their own beliefs, not out of faith or conviction, but as useful tools. They exploited these stories and blended the true history with their false teachings to gain influence and attract followers. This approach proved both popular and profitable and it spread rapidly—much like the earlier individuals who had broken away from the Church to form their own groups.

The ancient Romans were known for honoring a vast number of deities, and they believed their success as a world power was due to their collective piety or <em.pietas—a sense of religious devotion, duty, and loyalty—expressed through maintaining good relations with the gods. The empire thrived by absorbing the religious traditions of the many peoples it conquered, tolerating and showing devotion to a pantheon of gods. So when Christianity began to grow, Roman religious leaders didn’t try to destroy its teachings—they absorbed and adapted them as they mixed them together with other of their already established religious practices.

Ancient Roman religion was centered more upon knowledge of the correct practice of prayer and ritual rather than upon faith in what was believed. When God’s Church began after AD 31 and the teaching of Christianity began to spread, the priests and teachers of the Roman deities found it easy to assimilate those practices and teachings about God and Christ into their own. This practice and movement proved so successful that they too adopted the name “Christian” to identify themselves.

The result was a counterfeit movement that bore Christ’s name but had little to do with His teachings. While God’s true Church suffered beatings, imprisonments, and executions, this false version of Christianity was thriving—welcomed, protected, and eventually celebrated within the empire.

This was no longer just persecution. It was replacement. A new “Christianity” was rising—and it was not from God.

Two Christianities: A Visible Division Emerges
In AD 306, after the death of his father, Constantine was declared emperor by his army. Over the next several years, he fought a series of civil wars, and by AD 324, emerged as the sole ruler of the Roman Empire.

Even before securing full control, Constantine began to work to change religious beliefs and practice within the Roman Empire. He started promoting a new version of Christianity—one that was emerging and gaining popularity within the Roman world. This version looked and sounded similar to true Christianity, but it was fundamentally different.

In AD 313, Constantine issued the Edict of Milan. It granted legal tolerance to Christians, allowing them to assemble, build churches, and reclaim property previously taken from them. But while it sounded like a move in favor of Christianity, it was only part of a much larger plan—one that became clearer in the years that followed.

By AD 321, Constantine enacted the legislation of Sunday Law. He decreed that all work should cease on that day—except for farmers, if necessary. The intent was to designate this day for religious observance. That law was soon followed by more regulations that further elevated Sunday as a day of worship across the empire.

But this wasn’t about honoring the Sabbath as taught in the Bible. Constantine was clearly beginning to assimilate ideas of Christianity into beliefs that were already established in the Roman world having to do with the worship of deities—especially those linked to sun worship—on Sunday (the 1st day of the week). This becomes even more evident in the wording of his proclamation: “On the venerable day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed.”

This wasn’t just political maneuvering; it was religious assimilation. Constantine aimed to unify the empire culturally, which was centered around religion, by merging familiar religious customs with the rising influence of Christianity. And he found a convenient bridge in Sol Invictus—the official sun god of the empire. Worship of the “Unconquered Sun” or “Invincible Sun” was the primary religious belief and practice at that time. It remained dominant until Constantine began shifting its symbolism toward his rebranded Christianity.

The worship of Sol Invictus, a later version of the sun god Sol, was revived as the chief deity of the Roman Empire by Emperor Aurelian in AD 274. This worship remained dominate until Emperor Constantine began to shift that influence by blending elements of Christianity with existing pagan beliefs. Over several decades, he introduced gradual and constant changes that merged the two systems of worship. Each change drawing his version of Christianity further from the original faith taught by Christ and His apostles. The clearest change came with the enforcement of Sunday as the new day of worship

This single move created a visible divide. It was a marked distinction between two opposing groups, each calling themselves Christian.

On one side were those from the original group who continued to observe the seventh-day Sabbath and God’s appointed Holy Days, just as the apostles had taught—as commanded by God. Because of these observances, they were often grouped together with the Jews—and increasingly targeted for it. Observing God’s laws heightened the persecution of the Church.

On the other side was a fast-growing movement: a state-supported Christianity that now embraced Sunday—the first day of the week—as the new “Sabbath,” blending truth with tradition and Roman religious customs.

Constantine’s Sunday law marked more than just a legal shift—it drew a clear line between two very different versions of Christianity that coexisted at the time. The formal recognition and adoption of Sunday as the Sabbath by traditional Christianity set the stage for what became, just four years later, the greatest cover-up in Christian history.

Constantine’s Goal Was Unity, Not Truth
In the 150 years leading up to Constantine’s rise, a new and increasingly popular form of Christianity had taken root across the Roman Empire. But with its rapid spread came division. Independent priests across the empire taught varying beliefs and interpretations, creating confusion and religious fragmentation.

By the time Constantine was drawn to the Christian movement and formally converted, he saw its potential—not for truth, but for unifying his empire. As Roman Emperor, his endorsement gave this evolving form of Christianity tremendous credibility and authority, leading to its rapid spread and acceptance throughout the empire.

By AD 325, the movement led by priests of the Roman Empire—who were now calling themselves Christian—had grown so influential that Emperor Constantine intervened to unify their teachings. History records show that he took this step because these priests, scattered across various regions, had formed different factions and were divided in their beliefs. His goal was to bring them together and establish a new, state-sponsored religion.

As part of this effort, Constantine not only worked with the priests to create doctrinal unity, but also moved to eradicate and outlaw a particular sect of Christianity—one that many Romans saw as too closely tied to Judaism. In reality, this group was God’s true Church, the one founded in AD 31 by Christ’s apostles.

Jews had long been hated within the Roman world, and that hostility still persisted at this time. As a result, original Christianity—which continued to observe the seventh-day Sabbath and rejected the newly imposed Sunday laws—was also negatively affected.

Indeed, Constantine wasn’t pursuing truth. He was building an empire. And to do that, he had to eliminate anything that threatened his vision of religious and political unity—including the true teachings of Christ.

Consolidation of a New Christianity
The Roman Emperor Constantine called for a conference to unify and establish the core beliefs of Christendom within the Roman Empire. This gathering, in AD 325, became known as the Council of Nicaea. Constantine didn’t just sponsor the council; he actively participated in its decisions.

At this council, the Nicene Creed was established—a formal statement of belief that introduced the doctrine of the Trinity. Historical accounts indicate that one of Constantine’s main motivations for convening the council was to resolve the growing controversy surrounding the teachings of a Roman priest named Arius.

Constantine and many of the leading Roman priests viewed Arius as too closely aligned with the teachings of certain Jews who were spreading their understanding of Christ throughout the empire. Arius was gaining influence and a following.

A major point of dispute among the Roman priests was about the nature of Christ. Arius taught that Christ—the son of God—was a created being whose existence began with his birth from Mary. However, the more popular dominant group, supported by Constantine, believed that Christ was also God and had existed eternally.

The doctrine of the Trinity became one of the several key teachings adopted at that time, forming the foundation of what became the official religion of the Roman Empire.

Arius was declared a heretic and exiled. Though he agreed with many of the other teachings of the Roman priests, he refused to renounce his belief that Christ did not exist before His birth from Mary. His opposition prompted the others to consolidate and solidify their stance on Christ’s eternal existence and formalize the Trinity doctrine.

The “Mystery” That Buried the Truth About the Messiah
The doctrine of the Trinity—officially adopted by this newly formed Roman Church—became one of the most influential tools used to bury the truth about the Messiah. Yet this belief is not found anywhere in scripture.

This same church later referred to the Trinity as a “mystery.” They acknowledged that it lacks clear biblical support and is beyond human understanding. Still, they taught that it is not something to be questioned, but rather something to be accepted and worshiped. But what exactly is this doctrine?

According to the Trinity, there are three distinct beings—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—who together form one God. Each of these is viewed as a distinct, individual god-being, yet they are all considered to be one unified entity. The concept is often portrayed as a spiritual version of the “three musketeers”—yet as a kind of divine trio—three co-equal, co-eternal members of a single godhead.

But scripture doesn’t describe God this way.

When discussing the holy spirit, God reveals a distinction between a spirit essence that comprises a spirit creation and physical elements that make up a physical creation. There is a spirit-created existence, and there is a physically created existence. God is described as having a spirit existence, and He is said to have created angelic beings who were given a spirit existence.

Everything that is spirit comes from God. He created a spirit realm and spirit beings—angels. The spirit that proceeds from God represents His power to work and create. The holy spirit, specifically, is described as the power that comes from God to reveal His mind, His word, His will, and His truth to those He chooses to receive or understand it.

We have a physical mind, and we express our thoughts physically through speech. But our thoughts are not separate beings from us. God’s thoughts—and the way He communicates them—are expressed through His spirit, not through a separate being. It is God’s holy spirit—not a distinct being known as “the Holy Spirit.”

Nowhere in scripture is the power of God’s spirit—or the holy spirit—described as being an individual or independent being, or as a separate member of a “god family” or “godhead.” On the contrary, God reveals that He alone has eternally existed:

“I am the ETERNAL, and there is no other. There is no God except Me. I gird [to clothe, to equip] you, although you have not known Me, so that they may know from the rising of the sun to its setting, that there is none [no one] besides [apart from] Me. I am the ETERNAL, and there is none other” (Isaiah 45:5-6).

This declaration removes all doubt. Yahweh Elohim—the Eternal God—declares that He alone is the One Eternal Self-Existing God.

Yahweh Elohim, the One Eternal Self-Existing God, is described in scripture as being the Father of Joshua the Christ. Joshua is never described as having existence before His human birth, until born of Mary.

An account in Matthew shows that Joshua the Christ was conceived in Mary, His earthly mother, through the power of God’s spirit:

“Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the holy spirit [from the holy spirit of God’s mind]. Now she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Joshua, for He will save His people from their sins” (Matthew 1:20-21).

In the Book of Luke, Mary was also told that the child she would bear was from God and would be called the Son of God.

Joshua did not exist before his human birth. He was not co-eternal with God the Father. He was begotten by God, born of a woman, to fulfill a specific purpose—to become the Passover and Messiah for all mankind.

The Trinity not only distorts that truth but replaces it with confusion. It replaces clarity with contradiction, and in doing so, it buries the true identity and mission of the Messiah.

Triad Deities and the Birth of the Trinity
Knowing how the Romans assimilated the religious beliefs of various conquered regions as a means to promote unity within their empire, it becomes easier to understand how they combined those ideas to create a different form of Christianity. So it should come as no surprise that they did the same with the development of their new Trinity doctrine.

A simple Internet search about triple deities is quite revealing.

The doctrine of the Trinity was not born from scripture but from centuries of Roman religious tradition. The idea of three deities functioning as one was nothing new. Triple deities—also known as triads—were common in ancient mythology and religion. These figures often appeared as a single god with three distinct aspects, forms, or roles.

One of the most prominent examples in Roman religion was the Capitoline Triad: Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva. This trio formed the core of Roman spiritual life from as early as the founding of the Roman Republic in 509 BC. It represented power, protection, and wisdom—and it was central to the state religion for centuries. Even during Constantine’s time in the fourth century AD, triad worship remained a familiar and well-established part of Roman spirituality.

So when Constantine and Roman priests sought to unify the empire under a new religion, the concept of a triad was already deeply rooted. It wasn’t difficult to reframe this idea using new names: God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit. In doing so, they reshaped Christianity into something more aligned with the traditional Roman mindset—something that felt both new and comfortably familiar.

In essence, the Trinity doctrine was not a biblical revelation but a strategic adaptation. It gave the Roman Empire a unifying religious identity, built on a structure their people already understood and accepted.

The Nicene Council Further Buried Truth About God’s Son
The Council of Nicaea in AD 325 did far more than just establish the doctrine of the Trinity. It also formalized two of the most significant corruptions of early Christian practice: the replacement of Passover with Easter and the move from Sabbath worship on the seventh day (Saturday) to Sunday worship.

At that council, it was decreed that Easter should be observed on the first Sunday after the first full moon following the spring equinox. Passover—once a central observance for those who followed Christ’s teachings—was not only replaced but eventually outlawed. This was because Easter, as adopted by the Roman Church at that time, directly conflicted with the annual spring observance of Passover, both in timing and meaning.

This new form of Roman Christianity also used the Easter story to justify changing the Sabbath from the seventh day of the week (Saturday) to the first day (Sunday). However, this change was not based on scripture, but on their own authority—claiming that Christ was resurrected on a Sunday morning, which he was not! This has already been proven in previous chapters.

The Council of Nicaea played a central role in what became the greatest cover-up in history. Under Constantine’s leadership, a new version of Christianity was formed. The religious beliefs he promoted as the official faith of the Roman Empire buried the truth about Joshua the Christ and obscured His role as the true Passover for all humanity.

By introducing the Trinity, this new Christianity distorted the reality of the identity of Christ. The apostles had taught that He was fully human, born of Mary and begotten by God. But the new Roman doctrine declared Christ to be a member of an eternal godhead—God in the flesh. This doctrine, known as the Incarnation, claimed that “Jesus” was both fully God and fully man.

He was not God and had never been—and to claim otherwise is to deny the truth! If He had been God, He would not have been able to die. And if He couldn’t die, then His suffering would have been meaningless. What would be the point of the scourging (being flogged by a whip with multiple thongs), the impalement, and the spear in His side if He was never truly capable of death? He endured it all—fully and painfully—just as any human would.

The belief that Christ has eternally existed undermines the very purpose of His death and the significance of what He accomplished as a human being. Over time, many people have simply accepted the idea of the Trinity without questioning or examining what they were taught. If God cannot die, and Joshua was fully God, then His resurrection is no longer a triumph over death—but a staged event with no real consequence. The gravity of the Passover sacrifice is lost.

This doctrine of Incarnation is just as convoluted and absurd as the doctrine of the Trinity itself. It suggests that one member of the godhead—the second—chose to become Christ, existing as both God and man at the same time, while the first member could then be called the Father of the second member who became “Jesus” Christ.

Easter, which was introduced to replace Passover, completely obscures the true purpose and meaning of that original observance—especially the profound significance of Christ being the Lamb of God. And with the loss of Passover, came the loss of the only sign Joshua the Christ said would prove He was the true Messiah: being in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights.

The truth of when Christ was resurrected—at the very end of the weekly Sabbath, just before sunset—was erased. With that key proof of His identity as the Messiah lost, it became easier to falsely claim that Sunday had become the new “Sabbath day”—the day on which Christ and God should be worshipped.

This Roman Church began preaching a different Christ than the one the apostles taught. It also introduced different doctrines, teachings, and a different gospel. It grew increasingly distinct—and mostly opposed—to the original teachings of the apostles.

And nearly all of traditional Christianity has embraced it.

The church that emerged from the Nicene Council became the dominant force in the world and took on the identity of that old Roman Church. But this was not the Church established by the apostles. It began teaching a different Christ, a different gospel, and a different doctrine—one that would grow to look nothing like the faith once delivered to the apostles.

How a New Christianity Gained Popularity and Rose to Dominance
Once it gained the backing of Rome’s most powerful ruler, the Roman Church—established by Emperor Constantine—quickly rose to dominance. With the full force of the Roman Empire behind it, this new version of Christianity flourished in size, popularity, influence, and power. Over time, it came to be recognized simply as “Christianity,” while God’s true Church was increasingly oppressed and suppressed, and labeled as a dangerous sect.

As this Roman Church expanded, its reach went beyond religion. It began to exert real political power—first within the empire, and then across the kingdoms of Europe. For centuries, this influence helped determine the rise and fall of rulers, shape national policies, and even spark wars. It wasn’t just a church; it was a force that shaped the course of Western civilization.

Early on, the Roman Church focused on consolidating its authority by establishing laws that reinforced its doctrine and by silencing its opposition. Its primary opponents were two groups: the Jews and God’s own Church. Both continued to uphold the original biblical Sabbath on the seventh day, as commanded by God and practiced by Christ and the apostles.

That observance—faithful and uncompromising—stood in stark contrast to the Roman Church’s new doctrine, which had replaced Sabbath observance with Sunday worship. And because of that, those who kept the seventh-day Sabbath became their greatest threat.

The Sabbath or Sunday
In AD 364, the Roman Church in the East convened the Council of Laodicea, gathering 30 religious leaders and priests from Asia Minor. Among the various issues addressed, one decree in particular targeted the weekly day of worship.

Canon 29 of the Council of Laodicea states:

“Christians must not judaize [adopt Jewish practices] by resting on the [Jewish] Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honoring the Lord’s Day [1st day of the week, Sunday], and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema [excommunicated] from Christ.”

This was no small shift. The Roman Church was clearly struggling to justify Sunday worship, especially since scripture—particularly the Old Testament—consistently points to the seventh day (Saturday, beginning Friday at sunset) as the true Sabbath.

Because Jews were widely despised in the Roman world, this new church began using language that reflected and reinforced this prejudice. The term “judaize,”—meaning to adopt Jewish customs—already carried a negative connotation. By applying it to the practice of observing the Sabbath, which was associated with Judaism, this church further encouraged the rejection of the seventh-day Sabbath by making it sound repugnant and offensive by association.

This was especially ironic, given that Laodicea was part of the very region of Asia Minor where Paul—apostle to the Gentiles—had preached and taught the original gospel of Christ. There, he established churches, taught the people and observed the same Sabbath day of worship as the Jews. In nearby cities like Colossae, Ephesus, and Philadelphia, the early Church upheld the true Sabbath long before this newly redefined version of Christianity arrived.

Still, this new church of Rome struggled to justify its practice of Sunday worship, which had been officially established just 43 years earlier by Constantine’s Sunday law decree. This decree upheld the same day of worship that the Roman Empire long dedicated to Sol Invictus—the Invincible Sun—in its traditional religious practices.

This Roman Church tried calling their new day of worship—Sunday—a “Sabbath,” but the term was too closely tied to the seventh day. So they pushed another label—“The Lord’s Day.” Over time, constant repetition and reinforcement blurred the distinction. Eventually, Sunday came to be referred to interchangeably as both “the Lord’s Day” and “the Sabbath.”

The Lord’s Day—A New Sabbath?
Traditional Christianity has sought to defend the use of the term of “the Lord’s Day” as a replacement for the Sabbath, designating Sunday as the new day of worship for Christians. The primary argument, though expressed in various ways, essentially claims:

“Sunday, the first day of the week, is the day Christians traditionally observe worship and rest, as they are commemorating Jesus’ resurrection.”

But as thoroughly addressed earlier in this book, Christ was not resurrected on a Sunday morning—or on any part of Sunday at all. According to Christ’s own words, the only proof He gave of being the true Messiah was that He would be in the heart of the earth for three full days and three full nights. That timeline proves He was resurrected near the end of the weekly Sabbath—just before sunset on the seventh day. This was the very day that God the Father had appointed as a weekly, sacred time for His people to worship Him.

Despite this, nearly all churches within traditional Christianity who continue to use the term “the Lord’s Day” to refer to Sunday, firmly believe that Sunday morning worship honors Christ’s resurrection and provides a valid reason to no longer observe the seventh-day Sabbath. Because of that, they claim that Sunday is now the “Christian Sabbath,” though the Bible defines the Sabbath as the seventh day of the week—from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset.

To support the switch, churches often cite a handful of Bible scriptures, though none of them mention or authorize a change of the Sabbath. It seems that whenever the first day of the week is mentioned in the New Testament, some feel compelled to interpret it in a way that appears to support Sunday worship—even when the text does not actually say so. These verses are often taken out of context or twisted to imply a meaning that simply isn’t there.

One of these verses often quoted is found in Acts 20, where Paul is said to have met with the disciples on the first day of the week, broke bread, and taught them. It’s as if the mention of “breaking bread” on the first day of the week—along with teaching—is taken as proof that he observed Sundays as his regular day of worship. But “breaking bread” is just a common phrase for sharing a meal. Paul often taught whenever and wherever he had the opportunity—not just on the seventh-day Sabbath. In this instance, the gathering occurred after sunset, marking the start of the first day of the week (Saturday evening), and Paul taught until midnight before leaving the next day.

Another verse frequently cited is Revelation 1:10, where John says:

“I was in the spirit on the Lord’s Day, and I heard behind me a loud voice, as of a trumpet…”

Simply mentioning “the Lord’s Day” is often taken as proof that it refers to Sunday—but without any clear scriptural support. In fact, this may be one of the weakest verses used to justify Sunday worship. Scripture itself clarifies what “the Lord’s Day” truly is. In Matthew 12:8, Christ plainly states:

“For the Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath day.”

It clearly states that Joshua the Christ, as the Son of man, is Lord of the Sabbath day, which is the seventh day of the week, not the first day of the week—Sunday.

It is primarily the Protestant churches of traditional Christianity that try to justify Sunday worship using the resurrection argument and a handful of misapplied scriptures in the New Testament. However, there’s an important admission found within the Roman Catholic Church itself—an institution that traces its authority directly back to Constantine and the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD.

The Catholic Encyclopedia acknowledges that there are no scriptures giving authority to change the 7th day Sabbath to the 1st day of the week on Sunday. Rather, they declare that it is by their own authority that this change was made, which they claim was given to the Catholic Church through its popes to do so.

They acknowledge that there is no scriptural authority for such a change, and not even a Sunday morning resurrection that could give such authority.

In short, even the originators of the Sunday tradition concede that it is not based on scripture, and not even on the timing of Christ’s resurrection. The foundation of Sunday worship rests not in the Bible, but in decisions made by human institutions centuries after the Church began.

Protestant Churches Accepted the Authority of the Catholic Church
The Catholic Church openly acknowledges that changes in doctrine are made based on its own authority and that of the pope. And when it comes to the core beliefs held by most Protestant churches today, history shows that they have, perhaps unknowingly, accepted that authority.

Consider this: Sunday worship, Easter, Christmas, the Trinity, the idea of the soul being immortal, going to heaven or hell immediately after death, Christ dying on a cross, being resurrected on a Sunday morning, or having eternally existed—none of these doctrines were taught by Joshua the Christ or by the apostles who wrote most of the New Testament. Yet, they are commonly believed and practiced throughout traditional Christianity.

Where did these teachings come from? They were developed, defined, and formalized by the Roman Catholic Church—often centuries after the original Church was established.

So when Protestant churches accept these doctrines and beliefs as foundational to their faith, they are not following scripture. Instead, they are following the teachings and decisions of the Roman Church. Whether they realize it or not, by adopting these beliefs, they are also accepting the authority of the Catholic Church as the source of those doctrines.

This raises a sobering question: If these beliefs don’t originate from scripture, and weren’t taught by Christ or His apostles, why are they so widely accepted? The answer lies in tradition—not truth. And tradition, when it replaces God’s word, becomes the foundation of deception.

Only the Beginning of Truth That Was Covered-up
While the greatest religious cover-up in history took shape in AD 325, that event was only the beginning. The actions taken by the church at that time laid the foundation for centuries of further distortion—layer upon layer of doctrine built not on scripture, but on human authority and tradition.

This book will continue to uncover those distortions. As we move forward, we will examine many more false teachings and reveal the powerful truths that were silenced or rewritten along the way.

The uncovering has only just begun.