By Tony K Sept 2017
Presently, we are witnessing an obvious increase in the embracement of ancient paganism into society. Largely, these were pagan religious beliefs that had many of their roots in ancient Babylon. One of the ways this manifests itself is in goddess worship. I chose the title in an attempt to bring attention to the fact that this goddess worship, under whatever guise it takes, is a deceptive counterfeit of true and sound doctrine. It certainly should have no place within Christianity. Let us trace the origins of this deception.
In polytheistic religions, a goddess is a female deity. Polytheistic religions honour a plethora of gods and goddesses. The modern Mother goddess, or Great goddess personification, stems from a combination of female deities from past cultures, blended with generally polytheistic cultures and religions found throughout today’s society. Often this is associated with movements loosely known as Neopaganism. This is finding its way into commonly used terms such as “Mother Earth” or “Mother Nature”.
One of the subtle ways of goddess worship today is through using these terms.
Sometimes in goddess worship, terms such as the “sacred feminine” or the “feminine divine” are used. Usually in one way or another, goddess worship is associated with the earth, the moon, and fertility. Believers in the Mother goddess think of the power as a kind female energy force inside every living thing, as well as in inanimate objects such as the earth, moon, cosmos, etc.
This type of spirituality often appeals to women who see this as a source of empowerment; however, an interesting fact is that in ancient pagan cultures where goddess worship was common, women were temple prostitutes in the very temples that were devoted to the goddesses. Rather than bringing empowerment, it represented sexual slavery for the appeasement of the goddess.
GAIA Worship or the Worship of Mother Earth
Among many environment and “Green” type movements, the term “Gaia” is used. Gaia worship is essentially paganism. The goal of these movements is to unite the earth under the goddess of Mother Earth. In other words, they hold the earth up as being a female deity. Generally, among the worshippers of Gaia or Mother Earth, we see a somewhat collective consciousness belief system that holds the earth up as having a spirit to which humans can become attuned. This rejects Christianity’s belief in a creative Father God.
Wiccans hold a belief system that is duotheistic in nature – they believe in a goddess and a horned god. The Wiccan goddess is much like Gaia and is supposedly the mother of all life. This goddess is known as the “Queen of Heaven”.
In this article, I want to focus primarily on the various forms of goddesses who have been known as the “Queen of Heaven”.
In the following passage from Jeremiah, there are clear references to the belief in a queen of heaven among the ancient Hebrews, which they followed when they were swayed away into serving and worshipping false gods.
“But we will certainly do whatever has gone out of our own mouth, to burn incense to the queen of heaven and pour out drink offerings to her, as we have done, we and our fathers, our kings and our princes, in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem. For then we had plenty of food, were well-off, and saw no trouble.
But since we stopped burning incense to the queen of heaven and pouring out drink offerings to her, we have lacked everything and have been consumed by the sword and by famine.” ~ Jeremiah 44:17-18, NKJV.
Where did this goddess worship stem from? Let us now look at a passage in the book of Ezekiel:
“And He said to me, “Turn again, and you will see greater abominations that they are doing.” So He brought me to the door of the north gate of the Lord’s house; and to my dismay, women were sitting there weeping for Tammuz.”~ Ezekiel 8:13-14, NKJV.
Who was Tammuz? Tammuz was a Mesopotamian god. In fact, the belief was that Tammuz was the reincarnation of Nimrod. Nimrod was a Babylonian King who took a wife whose name was Semiramis. Semiramis was also Nimrod’s mother! Therefore, since King Nimrod married his mother, she became “Queen of Babylon”. Supposedly, Nimrod was killed by the sons of Noah. His mother Semiramis gave birth to a son named Tammuz. She claimed that Tammuz was Nimrod reincarnated – A counterfeit trinity: Nimrod (King and Father), Semiramis (Queen) and Tammuz (son).
Throughout time, Nimrod, Semiramis, and Tammuz, had various names in different cultures. In each culture, Semiramis (under whatever name), was revered as “The Queen of Heaven”. Counterfeit trinities are prevalent in many ancient religions. Rather than Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as in the true trinity, these counterfeits have a pattern of Father, Mother, and Son. Some examples include Osiris, Isis, and Horus in Egypt, and Nimrod, Semiramis, and Tammuz in Babylon.
The goddess has had many names depending on what culture in which she was associated. Some of these names include Astarte, Diana, Ashtoreth, Libertas, Isis, and Ishtar.
Ishtar and Libertas
In ancient Babylon, Ishtar was known as “The Mother of Harlots”, patron of personal freedom, and goddess of immigrants. The Greek version of Ishtar was Libertas. In 1884, French freemasons gifted the Statue of Liberty to the city of New York. This statue is a representation of Libertas, or Ishtar, the “Queen of Heaven”. She has a seven-spiked crown on her head. Interestingly, there is also a Babylon in New York. I wonder if this is a coincidence that it sits on the border of Queens County.
It is of interest to note that it was freemasons who gifted the statue. Goddess worship, though somewhat disguised, is clearly a part of freemasonry. This becomes obvious when one looks into the three great lights of masonry, the beehive, and even the square and compass in some depth. American President Grover Cleveland dedicated The Statue of Liberty on October 28, 1886. It was the creation of Frederic-Auguste Bartholdi. Bartholdi was clearly mindful that the Statue of Liberty was a representation of a sun goddess.
This raises compelling questions concerning the roles of New York and The United States in regards to “Mystery Babylon” as spoken of in the Book of Revelation.
Mary – Queen of Heaven?
Evidently, I am now likely going to greatly annoy any Catholics who read the remainder of this article. Years ago, I steadfastly believed that the Mary presented in statues and in paintings when showing an “immaculate heart”, truly represented Mary the mother of Jesus. I believed in praying the rosary, and that the Marian apparitions were actually her appearances. Yet, now I believe nothing could be further from the truth.
Mary, Jesus mother, was certainly a blessed woman and highly favoured by the Lord. I certainly do not seek to deny that. She played a tremendous role in the life of Jesus here on earth. In all probability, she also still has a place of exceedingly high honour in the Kingdom of Heaven. Nevertheless, does that make her the “Queen of Heaven”, or someone that we should pray to…? Absolutely not! I do not believe that it does. Let us examine why not.
First, carefully read the following description of the goddess Diana. Particularly note that besides being a virgin goddess, she also swore never to marry (or have sexual relations) and compare this to the Catholic version of Mary.
Next, notice that Mary is called both the “Mother of God” and the “Queen of Heaven” by the Roman Catholic Church. Is that coincidence, or does it fit the pattern of the goddess worshipping religions?
Queen of Heaven is a title given to Mary, mother of Jesus, by Christians mainly of the Roman Catholic Church, and also, to some extent, in Eastern Orthodoxy and Anglicanism.[not in citation given] The title is a consequence of the First Council of Ephesus in the fifth century, in which Mary was proclaimed “theotokos“, a title rendered in Latin as Mater Dei, in English “Mother of God“.
The Catholic teaching on this subject is expressed in the papal encyclical Ad Caeli Reginam,  issued by Pope Pius XII. It states that Mary is called Queen of Heaven because her son, Jesus Christ, is the king of Israel and heavenly king of the universe; indeed, the Davidic tradition of Israel recognized the mother of the king as the Queen Mother of Israel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_of_Heaven
The Roman Catholic Church DOES acknowledge the trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Catholics do not put Mary in the godhead. They do not call her a goddess. However, we do see them placing her in the idolized position of “Queen of Heaven”.
We also see in Roman Catholic teaching and prayers, Mary referred to as the “Mother of God”. This is one place where I believe Catholic doctrine is misleading, because it makes it appear that Mary is God’s mother, and therefore above God. We do know that Mary was the earthly mother of Jesus when He was here in human form.
Regardless, she was a normal human being who found favour in God’s eyes. Whereas Jesus is the third person in the Trinity, (the Word of God: see John Chapter 1) and existed before time. Mary on the other hand, was born in the same way as any other human being. She was NOT pre-existent. The Vatican does not claim that Mary is above God or the mother of God the Creator. However, the title itself could easily be misconstrued, particularly when adding the title “Queen of Heaven”, which they also assign to Mary.
There is nowhere in scripture that says we should pray to, or through Mary. Rather, scripture says, “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus…”~ 1 Timothy 2:5, NKJV. I was raised a Catholic and previously believed in praying to (or through) Mary, but it is emphatically contrary to scripture. For the first 19 years of my life, I believed in the Pope’s infallibility; that the Catholic Church was the only true church. As a Catholic, that is what I was taught. I was never taught by the Church of the need to be born again as Jesus Himself taught. I went through my entire school years in the Catholic school system. Yet I never once heard this mentioned:
“Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” ~ John 3:3, NKJV.
Ironically, it was my devout Catholic grandmother (she was Spirit-filled and born again) who, together with one of her friends led me to pray the sinner’s prayer. They were also the ones who laid hands on me and prayed for the baptism of the Holy Spirit. For the next few months after that, I tried to remain in the Catholic Church as a born again Christian. Soon after that, God led me out of the Catholic faith and I began a journey of uncovering all the false beliefs I had picked up in the Roman Catholic Church; false beliefs I previously defended as supposedly being “truths”.
It is not my intention here to attack Catholics. Nor am I going to try to uncover all the false beliefs in this article. I plan to focus on just one thing, which is the doctrine of the “Queen of Heaven”. I believe this the repackaging of a pagan goddess theme that we find in many guises. Goddess honouring is gaining an increasing foothold in the world today.
Mary A Perpetual Virgin?
When I was a child growing up in the Catholic faith, we were taught that Mary was an “ever virgin” or “perpetual virgin”, and that Jesus was an only child. That is the official Catholic doctrine still today. Nevertheless, it is also contrary to scripture. The Gospel of Mark 6:3 and the Gospel of Matthew 13:55-56 state that James, Joses (or Joseph), Jude, and Simon were the brothers of Jesus, the son of Mary. The same verses also mention unnamed sisters of Jesus. (Source: Wiki)
In this article http://www.catholicbible101.com/jesushadbrothers.htm the Catholic Church attempts to explain this away using an argument that the word “adelphos” could also mean step bothers or cousins. However, there is no other case in the New Testament where “adelphos” means cousins. It is used to describe “brothers” in every case. For example Mark 1:16 speaks of Simon and Andrew his brother, and Mark 2:17 John the brother of James. There are many more examples similar to those. So where did this idea of Mary being a perpetual virgin come from?
The concept of Mary’s perpetual virginity derived from the early writings of a Catholic scholar named Origen (A.D. 185-254). His claims—based on the apocryphal Gospel of James—, which focuses on the childhood of Mary up to the birth and childhood of Christ, appeared around the middle of the second century.
This idea originated from the mystical practices of priestesses who worshipped various deities in Rome. The combination of Christianity and ancient pagan religions attracted early converts and became a dominant religious force. Mary’s traditional role as mother was changed and reworked as that of a perpetual virgin who should be worshipped as a goddess. This pseudo- Christian ideology made it easier for pagan worshippers to identify with her and, therefore, support the counterfeit religion. https://rcg.org/pillar/0902pp-pat.html
What does the Bible actually say about the marriage between Mary and Joseph and the virgin birth? Clearly, in the following passage it shows two things that I want to bring to the reader’s attention.
A). Mary was betrothed to Joseph, but they had not come together yet (physically). Mary was a virgin and Jesus was conceived through the working of the Holy Spirit. This confirms the virgin birth.
B). The angel instructed Joseph to go ahead and take Mary as his wife. Joseph did not put Mary away. He married her.
“Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily.
But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost”. ~ Matthew 1:18-20, KJV
We see in these verses that Mary was a virgin when Jesus was conceived, but nowhere does it say that she was a virgin AFTER Jesus birth. In all respects, the Bible plainly reveals to us that Mary & Joseph took part in consummation AFTER the birth of Jesus in Matthew 1:25:
“Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
And knew her not till [until] she had brought for the her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus”. ~ Matthew 1:24-25, KJV
This indicates a physical union between them when looking at the context. We see in verse 24 where Joseph took Mary as his wife. Immediately after, the scripture confirms they had no physical relations UNTIL AFTER she gave birth to Jesus. Since consummation generally takes place immediately after the marriage, the scripture is complete in verse 25 by letting us know this union was on hold during Mary’s pregnancy with Christ.
Furthermore, look at what scripture says about husbands and wives in the following verses:
“Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
Do not deprive one another except with consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control”. ~ 1 Corinthians 7:3-6 NKJV
Also, when we look at the Catholic Church’s own doctrine regarding marriage, as found in the document “Questions and Answers on Catholic Marital Sexual Ethics”, by Ronald L. Conte Jr. (http://www.catechism.cc/articles/QA.htm), sexual relations are an inherent part of the marriage act. So if Mary was a perpetual virgin, does that not break the bounds of what a marriage “should be”, according Catholic doctrine? Essentially, according to Catholic doctrine she was a wife who never had sexual relations with her husband. What type of marriage would that have been? It eludes the notion that simply because Mary was Jesus” earthly mother, that sex would have been forbidden – that because she is viewed “higher” than a mortal human, sex was somehow “unholy”.
Mary Needed a Saviour
In Luke chapter 1, in her own words, Mary acknowledges that God was her Saviour. If she were born sinless as the Catholic Religion teaches, then why would she have needed a Saviour?
“And Mary said,
“My soul magnifies the Lord, And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Saviour. For He has regarded the lowly state of His maidservant; For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed”. ~ Luke 1:46-48 NKJV
Praying To (or Through) Mary
I cannot locate one scripture where we are told to pray prayers such as “Holy Mary, mother of God, Pray for us sinners”. The rosary was supposedly given to Saint Dominic in 1214 by an alleged appearance of Mary. Why would the biblical Mary have given anyone prayers that are about giving her “honour” as the Hail Mary prayer does? The Mary that allegedly appeared to St Dominic would be seeking honour for herself. I ask… please show me a scripture where we are told to pray to, or through, any deceased person, saint, or otherwise. Catholics teach that praying to Mary is the quickest way to Jesus (http://dowym.com/voices/catholics-pray-mary/). However, there is nowhere in scripture where we are instructed that we need to do this, or should do this.
“Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death. Amen,” was added later. The petition first appeared in print in 1495 in Girolamo Savonarola‘s “Esposizione sopra l’Ave Maria.” The “Hail Mary” prayer in Savonarola’s exposition reads:
Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee; blessed art thou amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hail_Mary
Mary’s Assumption into Heaven, Fact or Fiction?
Central to the doctrine of the Vatican is the teaching of Mary’s purported “assumption” into heaven. We know that Jesus died, resurrected, and ascended into heaven. We find these things clearly referenced in scripture. Yet, there is no scriptural basis for Mary’s supposed assumption. Catholics celebrate the feast of the assumption on August 15th. It is a Holy Day of Obligation. On such days, the Catholic faithful are obliged to participate in the Mass.
By the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.
“Still, fundamentalists ask, where is the proof from Scripture? Strictly, there is none . . . The mere fact that the Church teaches the doctrine of the Assumption as something definitely true is a guarantee that it is true” (Karl Keating, Catholicism and Fundamentalism, [Ignatius Press, 1988], p. 275).
For the first three centuries of Christian history there is not one witness to Mary being bodily assumed. As Catholic writer Father Mateo admits, “Many writers have noted the absence of historical record for the Assumption of Mary. Explicit historical and, indeed, liturgical testimony for the belief is lacking. . .” (Father Mateo, Refuting the Attack on Mary, [Catholic Answers, Inc., 1999], p. 28). It’s not until the third century when a heretical narrative called The Book of Mary’s Repose presents something of relevance. This narrative, however, as Stephen Shoemaker notes, is a “heterodox apocryphon” (Stephen Shoemaker, “Death and the Maiden: The Early History of the Dormition and Assumption Apocrypha”, St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 50:1-2 (2006) 59-97, p. 65). This means it’s an unorthodox heretical text with opinions not accepted by Christianity at the time. Moreover, the narrative does not actually teach Rome’s dogma of the bodily assumption. Instead, it says Mary’s soul was taken to heaven first, and then sometime later her body was as well. Modern Rome on the other-hand claims she was taken both body and soul to heaven at the same time. Hence, one cannot claim the ideas of this heretical document came from the apostles. http://www.reformedapologeticsministries.com/2016/05/the-assumption-of-mary-is-unbiblical.html
Mary has supposedly appeared to people over the centuries in visitations or apparitions. Some of these visitations have been given official credence by the Vatican. Two of the most well-known apparitions that have been officially recognized by the Vatican occurred at Lourdes in 1858 and Fatima 1917.
Mary appearing to Lucia Abobora at Fatima, Portugal 1917 and announced the following:
“‘Jesus wishes to make use of you to have me acknowledged and loved. He wishes to establish in the world the devotion to My Immaculate Heart’…[Lucia Recalled,] ‘Before the palm of the right hand of Our Lady was a Heart encircled by thorns which seemed to have pierced it like nails. We understood that it was the Immaculate Heart of Mary outraged by the sins of humanity, for which there must be reparation.’”
On March 25th 1858 in an appearance of “Mary” to Bernadette Soubirous at Lourdes, she announced that SHE was the Immaculate Conception.
After approximately an hour in which Bernadette had remained entranced as she gazed upon the beautiful face, the Lady finally gave an answer to Bernadette’s repeated question asking her what her name was:
“I AM THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION”.
This statement from the Lady (who was, of course, the Blessed Virgin Mary) confirms the infallible Doctrine of Pope Pius IX, who had spoken “ex catedra” four years earlier. He had declared that the Virgin Mary, alone of all human beings who have ever lived (except for Jesus, and our first parents, Adam and Eve) was conceived without the stain of original sin in her mother’s womb.
In both of these cases, the apparition claimed to have had a sinless immaculate heart, or to have been an immaculate conception. Again, I will point out here that in Luke chapter 1, the real Mary said, “And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Saviour”. Here is clear indication that Mary needed a Saviour. She needed salvation through Jesus’ death and resurrection as much as any other human being ever has. The fact that whatever Pope Pius IX declared to be true and considered to be infallible, is another false Catholic doctrine. But, it is beyond the scope of this article to cover that angle.
Due to the nature of the claims and the doctrines espoused by the Marian apparitions, it should be clear that something is amiss. Scripture does not supported them, but rather they contradict scripture. It is my opinion that rather than truly being appearances of the Mary of the Bible, they were more than likely demonic apparitions bringing devilish deceptions.
Looking at this from another angle, LA Marzulli recently sent me an advance screening of his upcoming film titled, “Fatima – Miracle of the Sun or a Harbinger of Deception”! What became known as the “Miracle of the Sun” occurred on October 13, 1917. Somewhere between 50,000 and 100,000 people were gathered in a field, and they saw something strange occur. Exactly what it was they saw is the question?
Extensive research into this subject has been conducted by LA Marzulli. In this excellent documentary, it has been discovered that all may not have been as it seemed. Mr Marzulli does a thorough job of examining the historical testimonies of witnesses to the event, and explaining why he believes that sinister spiritual forces may have been at work on that day. This includes those who attended leaving with radiation burns from the sun. For those who seek the truth on this subject, I highly recommend that they watch this film when released to the public.http://www.lamarzulli.net/
We live in a world where deceptions are rife. New deceptions seem to appear all the time. However, their roots can usually be traced back to ancient times. They are the same old lies that have been repackaged. Goddess worship and the beliefs in a “Queen of Heaven” go back thousands of years. The Bible clearly shows that as Christians, we should steer clear of them.
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth”.~ Exodus 20:3-4
*Note*: I want to thank Brook Ardoin for additional text and editing of this article – Tony K
Additional Research links (Please note that we do not necessarily endorse the beliefs that are held in the references):