Daddy Freeze, Christmas and “the Paganization of Christianity”

An ancient Jewish proverb says: “If you wish to strangle, be hanged on a good tree.” It means, if you must rely on an authority, you do well to make sure it’s a reliable one.

This was my deduction after watching an hour-long YouTube interview with Daddy Freeze by Abimbola Adelakun in July 2019.

For those who might not be familiar with these two figures, here’s a brief background:

Ifedayo Olarinde (popularly known as Daddy Freeze) is a Nigerian broadcaster who who propelled himself to national fame in 2016 by calling out and virulently criticizing the doctrines and practices of popular pastors and ministers in Nigerian churches. His regular boiler-plate rhetoric against Pentecostal clerics carved for him a niche, and in 2018, he declared himself the founder of the Free Nation In Christ Online Church (or “Free The Sheeple” movement).

Abimbola Adelakun is an Assistant Professor of African and African Diaspora Studies at the University of Texas. She is also a columnist with Punch Newspapers. Her research interests include Critical spirituality, Pentecostalism and Pentecostal culture, religious creativity and modern African cultural performances and expressions. She identifies as a “non-theist” and is obviously a Secular Humanist.

With the pedigree of both the interviewer and interviewee, I was hoping to gain some insights into the ideological underpinnings of this man who is frequently vaunted as an “undefeatable critic” of Nigerian Christianity.

But after ten minutes of listening to this man talk, I cringed at the wide gap between his bombastic claims and his supporting arguments. By the time the video got halfway through, I bristled and pressed “Stop” because I could no longer stomach his harsh, bullying tone and mutilation of basic facts, history and logic.

Since he touched on the topic of Christmas, I’ve decided to revisit that interview and address some of the things he said. His words appear in blue while Dr. Adelakun’s words are in green.

I’m going to throw some light on Christmas … A lot of people argue that, “Oh yes, we agree Christmas was a pagan festival, but Christ came to replace it.”

This a straw man. Whatever pagan worship that was occurring on December 25 prior to Christ, lacked any coherence or a chain of continuity that could be directly traced down to those observing Christmas today.

Granted, many customs, words, concepts and styles of one civilization pass on down and influence one another. But if some of them had pagan significance at some other time or place, it doesn’t mean it still does.

The fact that December period was observed in some old festivals doesn’t mean that they have the same influence or significance today. After all, people can choose any day of the week or month to observe whatever is of importance to them. You don’t have to forge a connection between theirs and the past.

Not to mention, our modern calendar is not the same as ancient calendar of other cultures.

Let me give you this example: you are the river goddess, I’m Christ, okay? We are both born on the same day. It makes no sense for us to shift Christ’s birthday if it happens to fall on the river goddess’ birthday. Hey, we are both born on the same day, let’s do it together, you understand? But we know the Christians are separated from the river goddess’ worshippers…

This is a vapid oversimplification of paganism and it does nothing to strengthen his argument.

Pagan religions don’t specify a date for the nativity of their deities. Most ancient festivals were based on local geographical weather, seasonal cycles, moon phases, and astrological dates. In plain terms, their festivals rarely fell on the same day each year.

For example, Tammuz, which the Encyclopedia Britannica defines as a Mesopotamian “god of fertility embodying the powers for new life in nature in the spring” had varying festival periods in the pagan calendar.

Easton’s Bible Dictionary says his festival was observed in Chaldea in “the month of July, the beginning of the summer solstice.”

The Fausset’s Bible dictionary says “an annual feast was kept to him in June” at Byblos.

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia says the “mourning by Tammuz was celebrated in Babylonia by women on the 2nd day of the 4th month… [while in Syria his death was celebrated] in midsummer.”

Now Christ was born three months before Christmas, and you took him from his birthday. You didn’t bother finding out what day he was really born and of all days you are matchmaking with the river goddess.

This is a frozen argument. The claim of Jesus being born on September or October is debatable, but Mr Freeze says it dogmatically. No one is definitely sure which exact month Jesus was born on, neither does it matter. What matters is that He was born.

The allegation of matchmaking a deity’s birthday to another also assumes that all ancient cultures or geographical locations used the same calendar or shared the same concept of their deity’s “birth.”

People like Daddy Freeze suppose that if something once had a pagan significance, it must always be of pagan significance! That’s untrue.

The days of the week and months of the year were named after pagan deities. They had pagan significance in the past, but it doesn’t mean they still do so.

Friday was named after Frigg and Thursday after Thor. That you hold a religious service on a Friday doesn’t mean you worship Frig. Neither does having your religious festival on a Thursday mean you worship Thor.

The names, Mercury, Venus, or Mars for planets were originally pagan names. But no one today supposes that planets are deities.

And you can’t hide behind Jewish calendar because during the Babylonian captivity, the Jews renamed some of their months in Babylonian terms. The month of Abib was renamed Nisan and another one was even named Tammuz! Yet no one would accuse Jews of worshipping Tammuz.

This time it was a god, Nimrod with Christ. And then you say you’re replacing Nimrod with Christ. Oh brilliant! But you’re still celebrating with Nimrod’s tree and the Yule and the mistletoe and the gifts and the parties, so where is the Christ?

It’s there

This is where he sounded so lopey that it was embarrassing for me to watch or listen to. Notice that even Dr. Adelakun who had no intention of defending Christianity had to point it out to him: the Christ you say is absent in Christmas is there. But daddy Freeze sees Nimrod.

Many anti-Christmas/anti-Easter zealots are like a close circuit; they read the same set of hogwash, rehash the same lines of arguments and repeat the same trope of misinformation which they never bother to fact check in any objective or valid sources.

So most of the time, when you’re dealing with the “Christmas-is-of-pagan-origin” folks, you’re stuck with a self-perpetuating and self-validating worldview. Mr so-and-so (who isn’t even a scholar in the field he’s pontificating on) says it or wrote it, and he is in our coterie, so that settles it.

I’ve written about the fatal flaws of the “Nimrod-is-god” assertion and I do not wish to repeat it here. Both the Bible and history indicate that Nimrod was never worshipped as a deity (whether a “father god” or “king of the gods”); he founded no religion and has no valid link to deities in the Babylonian, Persian Greek, Roman, or Nordic pantheon.

In plain terms, the old theory of the “Babylon connection” of Nimrod, Semiramis and Tammuz to pagan deities (both ancient and modern) is at best, tabloid sensationalism.

I don’t see it, unfortunately. I don’t see it. What I see is the paganization of Christianity and here is the biggest point that everybody misses, Christ never asked for his birthday to be celebrated. Never. There were many years that Paul went to meet Peter… no birthday. They remembered to do so many things but never remembered to celebrate his birthday? It was never part of the doctrine.

Daddy Freeze’s Free the Sheeple movement is simply one of the versions of the Sacred Name cults or Hebrew Roots movement. These are aberrant religious groups that teach that all of Christianity except theirs is irredemably infected with hellenized paganism, that Christianity went off the rails right from 325 AD.

Yup, no one got it right for 1700 years. The real name of God was lost, the name of Jesus was paganized. The gospel was paganized. Everyone was in darkness, lost and doomed for hell until the light came on in the 20th century when some pockets of people knew “the restored truth.”

And what’s their truth? That using the Hebrew name of God and Jesus, following the laws of Moses and disavowing apostle Paul and the epistles of the New Testament as “Greek pagan corruption” brings you to the light…yes, new light. Doesn’t that sound familiar yet?

So when Mr. Ifedayo goes off in tangents and tells us about how the only two birthdays in the Bible were instances where men were executed (the second through a chain of manipulation and indirect assassination), he’s not deriving this from either Scripture or history, but his cultish ideology – the kind that is inconsistently selective about pagan origins.

According to Browser’s Book of Beginnings, the earliest evidence of a game that featured two opposing teams kicking, tossing, and aggressively advancing a ball in opposite directions was practiced 5,000 years ago in Egypt—as a fertility rite. Sounds like football doesn’t it?

So why do they rail against Christmas and still play or watch soccer?

There are so many issues with Christmas. The paganization is not even the date (which even is paganized), the paganization is even the celebration…

In the Bible, Jesus is called a Lion (Rev. 5:5), Satan is also called a lion (1 Pet. 5:8). Using Daddy Freeze’s logic, Jesus is Satan!

The woman called Mystery Babylon had a cup in her hand; the Lord has a cup in his hand (Ps. 75:8). Using Daddy Freeze’s logic, God is mystery Babylon.

Pagan kings sat on thrones and wore crowns; the Lord sits on a throne and wears a crown (Rev. 1:4; 14:14). Using Daddy Freeze’s logic, the Lord Jesus is pagan.

Pagans worshiped the sun; the Lord is the “sun of righteousness” (Mal. 4:2). Pagan gods were likened to stars; the Lord is called “the bright morning star” (Rev. 22:16). Using his logic, the God of the Bible was “paganized.”

Someone needs to school Daddy Freeze (and Reno Omokri, another kook in the barrel) that taking a stand against paganism shouldn’t be taken to foolish extremes. If you want to fish for pagan origins behind every bush and shelf, you will have to reject the Bible as pagan!

All of the following practices or beliefs mentioned in the Bible were also known among pagans: raising hands in worship, taking off shoes on holy ground, a holy mountain, a holy place in a temple, offering sacrifices without blemish, a sacred ark, a city of refuge, bringing forth water from a rock, laws written on stone, fire appearing on a person’s head, horses of fire etc.

That some primitive tribes worshipped trees in the past doesn’t mean people decorating trees during Christmas today are worshipping trees. That’s the dumbest argument in the book.

When was Christ’s birthday celebration decided? 317 years after He died! Oh wow, it took you 300 years, and who decided it? The Council of Nicaea and Constantine who worshipped the sun all his life and “gave his life,” why because there was a problem in his kingdom. Come on.

This was the lowest water mark. Anyone who is so lacking in intellectual dignity to the point of claiming that the Council of Nicaea and Constantine decided on Christmas shouldn’t be taken as an authority on any Christian doctrine, no matter how large his YouTube subscribers might be. It’s simply irresponsible for Daddy Freeze to spout such an outright falsehood for public consumption.

At this point in the video (at 20:00-20:06) you could see the look of “My goodness, I can’t believe you’re this wack” on Dr. Adelakun’s face.

Okay, so I think this is where I’ll disagree with you. First of all, the things that you highlighted, it’s like you seem so much invested in faithfulness to an origin rather than looking at it as an appropriation of the past to meet the exigencies of the present. So if we say Jesus… [DF rudely interrupts her mid-sentence to ramble].

There is really nothing you can do because what you have called Christianity today is a composite of all these past paganism, Jewish culture

[DF quickly interjects again aggressively]:

My Christianity is a Christianity that starts in the red Bible which is the highlighted words of Jesus. Anything else that history has is history’s business.

Notice how he contradicts himself. He appeals to history to bolster his hypothesis that Nimrod is the figure being honoured at Christmas and leans on Constantine and the council of Nicaea, but when he was given a picture of history that conflicts with his bias, he quickly throws history into the bin and dives into that oh-so-cool solo scriptura jibe.

Daddy Freeze only considers history as  valid so long as it supports his abstractions, fancies and self-canonized authority. This is a very unreliable man, a hack who pretends to do serious research – a false teacher who shouldn’t be teaching you – that is, if you don’t wish to go astray.

On Christmas and Unsound Arguments

At every Christmas period, the social media is often awash with anti-Christmas zealots. The spectrum ranges from dyed-in-the-wool fundamentalists to heretical sects (like Jehovah’s Witnesses) to Hebrew-Roots adherents who present Hanukkah as a viable alternative.

Here, I will be responding to the unsound sticks of one Femi Aribisala who heads the Healing Wings cult.

Since 2012 when I first came across Femi Aribisala’s articles, he has carved a niche for himself as a critic of the Bible, Christianity and Christian holidays. His articles are often well-circulated by Muslims and other anti-Christians who are always eager to throw any media propaganda trash at the Bible.

I will be responding to his article titled “Why Christians Should not Celebrate Christmas” and I appeal to all those who loll out their tongues at his articles to fact check them and think critically before accepting his claims. His words are in bold.

Jesus never told anyone to celebrate his birthday. If he wanted to do so, he would have told us when and how. He did not.

Typical anti-Christmas talking point. This argument presumes that every celebration that is not directly commanded by Christ must be an innovative error. Did Mr Femi receive a command from Jesus to start writing newspaper articles before he did? Did the Lord command him to start his “Healing Wings” group? Did Jesus tell him when and how? I’m sure He didn’t.

In the same vein, the Lord Jesus doesn’t have to command His birth to be celebrated before it’s deemed acceptable. Celebrating Christmas is a personal decision, and as much as non-essential matters are concerned, “Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind” (Rom. 14:5).

God does not structure us into a labyrinth of rules or produce Christians on a factory assembly line.

Moreover, we know from the Scriptures that the early church never celebrated Jesus’ birthday. There is no such record in the Acts of the Apostles. We are told to remember the Lord’s death (Lk. 22:16) and not to celebrate his birth.

This is straight out of Watchtower writings. The hypocrisy here is that Aribisala believes apostle Paul was never a true Christian, that the Epistles are his perversions of Christ’s teachings.

Yet the very Acts of the Apostles he is appealing to offer credible evidence to the contrary. If the book of Acts is a reliable account of the early church, it must also be reliable enough to prove apostle Paul was a true Christian.

Now, if Jesus’ birth was as insignificant as this man wants us to believe, the Gospel writers wouldn’t have recorded it. Christ’s conception was announced by an angel; His birth was heralded by angels and His infancy was protected by God. The events surrounding His birth were fulfillment of Bible prophecies just as His death.

Aribisala goes on to parrot the Jehovah’s Witness argument that celebrating birthdays is bad because Pharaoh and Herod executed people on their birthdays (Gen. 40:20-22, Mt. 14:6-11). Nice try, but Pharaoh and Herod were basically evil people who killed people on every other day, not just on their birthdays.

December 25 celebrations actually started with sun worshippers during the time of Nimrod, the man who supervised the building of the tower of Babel. His widow, Semiramis, said to be queen of heaven had a son called Tammuz; venerated by many as the god of the sun.

This drivel is straight out of Jack Chick’s tracts and comics. For example, in their crusader comic, The Force, we read:

The queen of Babylon (Semiramis) ordered the world to celebrate the birth of her son, ‘Tammuz.’ He of course, was the sun god, Baal…” (p. 26).

This sensational story suffers from a host of problems:

a) There is no Biblical evidence that Nimrod supervised the building of the tower of Babel. The Bible says little about him and there’s no historical record of him. The Jack Chickian tales of Nimrod starting a religion or murdered by Shem should be taken with a pinch of Abakaliki salt.

b) Nimrod didn’t live in the same century as Semiramis, so it would have been impossible for them to be husband and wife. No reference work – Encyclopedia Britannica, Encyclopedia Americana, Encyclopedia Judaica, Encyclopedia of Religion or World Book Encyclopedia – puts Nimrod and Semiramis as contemporaries let alone as a couple.

c) Semiramis was never worshipped as a goddess or the queen of heaven. In fact, there is no trace of Semiramis in Sumerian or Babylonian records. She ruled over Assyria, not Babylon, and lived in the 9th century BC.

But worship of the queen of heaven goddesses predates Semiramis by many centuries. For example, an inscription on Asherah shows it dating as far back as the 18th century B.C. (Anne Baring and Jules Cashford, Myth of the Goddess, 1991, 454).

d) Tammuz was a Sumerian deity who was a lover to Inanna (later Ishtar) and a child to Enki and Ninsun. Tammuz is never described as an actual person and never mentioned as the son of Semiramis or Nimrod in any standard encyclopedia.

It’s a shame that a writer would still be publicly peddling an old, discredited fiction in this Information Age.

It was believed Tammuz died on December 22 and rose from the dead three days later

More powdered sparrow eggs from the stables of Hislop and Chick. The Easton’s Bible Dictionary under Tammuz says: “In the Chaldean calendar there was a month set apart in honour of this god, the month of June to July, the beginning of the summer solstice.”

Fausset’s Bible Dictionary says “An annual feast was kept to him in June.” Aribisala obviously has a very poor information source at his disposal.

Emperor Aurelian of Rome proclaimed the sun god Tammuz to be principal patron of the Roman Empire on December 25, 274 AD. The date corresponds with the winter solstice when pagans celebrated the renewed power of the sun.

Aurelian’s institution of the pagan festival on this date seems to have been to rival Christians who observed the date.

The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church notes an old tradition that fixed the date of Christ’s birth by counting 9 months after March 25 (or April 7), the vernal equinox on which some early Christians celebrated His conception giving rise to December 25.

Early church writers before Aurelian, like Julius Africanus “argues in his Chronicle (A.D. 221) for a date in the winter, December 25” (Everett Ferguson, Encyclopedia of Christianity, 1999, 251)

December 25 had no significance in the Roman pagan festal calendar before Aurelian. Thomas Talley notes that although Aurelian dedicated a temple to the sun god, “the cult of the sun in pagan Rome ironically did not celebrate the winter solstice nor any of the other quarter-tense days as one might expect” (Michael Anderson, Symbols of Saints, ProQuest, 2008, 42-46).

Constantine … forced all the pagans of his empire to be baptised into the Christian church … December 25, the date of Tammuz’s alleged rebirth was then designated as also the birthday of Jesus.

There you have it. Constantine forced all pagans into the church, even though the emperor himself is depicted on the Arch in Rome sacrificing to pagan deities! If anything, he was quite sympathetic to paganism.

This man is using one myth to prop up another myth, but he missed one fact: setting up a Christian holiday to replace a pagan holiday is not equivalent to marrying Christianity to paganism. What ancient pagans did on December 25 has no relevance to what modern Christians do on this date.

For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.” Jeremiah 10:3-4

This is allegedly condemning the Christmas tree, but these folks all stop the quote at vs. 4. Verse 5 says “Like a scarecrow in a melon patch, their idols cannot speak; they must be carried because they cannot walk. Do not fear them; they can do no harm nor can they do any good.

This is referring to gods made out of wood. Nothing here describes modern Christmas tree.

The same scenario is described in Isaiah 44 about carpenters shaping wood “in form of man … that it may dwell in a shrine … he makes a god, his idol; he bows to it and worships it” (vs. 13, 17).

That pagans in the past worshipped a tree doesn’t mean Christians who decorate a Christmas tree today are doing the same thing. I don’t see Christians bowing and praying to Christmas trees. If they were idols, no one would be throwing them out in the trash after a while.

[Pagan Greeks] used it [decorated trees] to worship their god Adonia. They claimed Adonia was killed and brought to life by the serpent Aessulapius

What has this man been reading? National Enquirer? Aliens? Adonia is the name of a festival, not a god. The proper name is Adonis.

Asklepios (Latin: Aesculapius) is a Greek god of healing and medicine depicted holding a staff with a coiled serpent. Again, Aribisala can’t get simple spellings or facts right. The feast of Adonia was not celebrated during winter and obviously not with “Christmas trees” either.

Smith’s Bible Dictionary says “A festival in honor of Adonis was celebrated at Byblus in Phoenicia … It took place in July, and it was accompanied by obscene rites.”

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia says “The women of Gebal used to repair to this temple [of Venus] in midsummer to celebrate the death of Adonis or Tammuz.”

Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible says the river named after Adonis “was fabled to run blood at his festival in August. The women of Phoenicia, Assyria, and Judea worshipped him as dead, with deep lamentation, wearing priapi and other obscene images all the while.”

That Aribisala had such chutzpa to publish this gobbledygook on at least two national newspapers speaks a lot of volumes. He seems to know his fans on the social space too well – ignorant, gullible and fanatical. But there is one thing I’m certain of, if you have truths on your side, you don’t need to bend facts or resort to fictitious claims.

The “Mirror Image” Syndrome

download (1).jpeg

Just as an image formed on a plane mirror is a duplication or reflection of the object placed directly opposite its surface, there is also a dangerous condition that can affect Christians contending for the faith which can make them start to reflect what they are contending against.

A person opposed to a set of errors can also develop signs of errors: becoming dishonest, hateful and rigid. I call it the “Mirror Image Syndrome.”

When this syndrome affects a cult expert, he can take on the very cultic mindsets he is standing against – exclusivism, elitism and tyranny of thoughts.

Sometimes it’s baffling how a person would seem to stand on an impressive edifice of Christian scholarship only for you to realise that his intellectual integrity is actually in the pits.

The more famous and influential a Christian figure is, the more they need to be held accountable for what they say or write in public, especially, if their agenda is more important to them than truth.

Previously, I used Rebecca Brown and Daniel Yoder as examples of how spiritual warfare can devolve into spiritual quackery when integrity is lacking.

In this piece, I will be using another popular Christian author to highlight the blighting effects of the Mirror Image Syndrome.

For five decades, Chick Publications, the organization founded by Jack Chick, has published hundreds of illustrated gospel tracts in different languages, along with many Christian articles, comics, books and videos on issues like abortion, homosexuality, false religions, evolution and Bible versions.

Fittingly, Dr. Rebecca Brown once worked for Mr. Chick. In her words, “Jack Chick is one of the kindest and most honest and Godly men I have ever met. He taught me many valuable things in the Lord’s work.” [1]

In the May/June 2016 Battle Cry article, we are also told that:

Many parents write to Chick Publications, grateful for the unwavering stand for the Truth in the tracts and books.”

Since 2003, I have feasted on many Chick materials. They influenced my early Christian walk and I believed every word in their materials as truth.

But when I began to double check things for myself, I started to question some of the “facts” being disseminated by Chick’s ministry said to be “standing for the Truth”:

1. The testimony comic series of ex-Jesuit priest, Alberto Rivera (1935-1997) drew much ire to Chick’s ministry when it was published.

Whether his testimony was genuine or fraudulent is still debatable. He gave dates and names of places and presented his ID card and papers. To an extent, he also defended himself before his critics.

Notwithstanding, there were several glaring errors and outright embellishments in his stories which cast much doubt on the veracity of his claims.

In the Double Cross, after he had left the monastery with his sister, the Mother Superior said with a frown:

“He is damned forever! The Virgin will take care of this Father Rivera. He is another Judas that has sold out our Holy Father, the Pope.”

How did Rivera know she said this?

Later, a Vatican priest asks his fellow, “Would Father Rivera go to the Jehovah’s Witnesses or the Mormons?” the other priest replies, “Never! He’s a real Christian and he knows about their false teachings.” [2]

Rivera wasn’t present there, so how did he know they said this?

Was he also suggesting that Catholic leaders don’t consider themselves to be real Christians but secretly admit that Protestants are?

Either Rivera or Chick was putting words into these people’s mouths to further an agenda.

2. The series spent more ink spreading Jesuit hysteria and instilling mistrust in readers than presenting the gospel to Catholics.

Alberto alleged that Kathryn Khulman was a Catholic “undercover agent” sent to the Pentecostals; Jim Jones was “another undercover Jesuit” who sacrificed his flock to fulfill his oath [3] and Fidel Castro was also a “well trained Jesuit under oath.” [4]

No credible evidence was presented to back up these accusations. The reader is simply asked to take Rivera’s word for it because he purportedly knew some centuries-old, “hot secrets” of the Vatican.

3. The Alberto comics are laced with Vatican conspiracy theories, wild enough to make Dan Brown green with envy.

Rivera claims the Nazi and Communist parties, the KKK, Illuminati, Masonry, Jehovah’s Witness, Mormonism, Christian Science, Unity cults and Islam were all founded and developed by the Catholic Church or Jesuits. [5]

Again, no evidence of these claims was given. While I agree that Catholicism is an aberrant religious system with a bloody history, to blame it for every other cult and social or political plague on earth is tabloid sensationalism and sheer inanity.

Satan has been creating false religions long before the Vatican came on the scene and he doesn’t need it to create a newer one today. Christians who wish to reach Catholics with the truth should not use these materials.

4. Chick’s Statement of Faith on their website says:

[W]e believe God in His Singular providential care has KEPT HIS WORD all through the ages, right down to the present day as found in the King James Version. We consider this version our final and absolute authority, above and beyond all other authorities on earth.”

This is “KJV Onlyism” in its strictest form. Its chief flaw is the silence on which Bible version was God’s Word “all through the ages” before the 17th century when the KJV emerged.

Their fully illustrated book, Did the Catholic Church Give us the Bible? tries to give the reader a “chain” of preservation:

In a valley in the Alps was a people that God used to translate His preserved words into Latin. These people were called the ‘Vaudois.’ They lived in the Piedmont Valley of the Alps, at the northwest corner of Italy, east of France. In about 120 AD some got saved, and went to Antioch to receive God’s words.” [6]

Where did they get this piece of information from? No citation or reference was provided there. Why? Because the statement is a lie.

The Vaudois (or Waldenses) were followers of Peter Waldo (1140-1205 AD). How could they have existed a millennium before Waldo was born? If the Vaudois didn’t exist at that time, to assert they went to Antioch to receive an Italian Bible is pure fabrication.

5. In order to cover up the fact that the KJV came from a Greek text by Desiderius Erasmus, a Catholic priest, the book says:

God chose Erasmus as His vessel to shine the light of the Gospel during the hellish Dark Ages … Erasmus was God’s undercover agent! By day he was a faithful Roman Catholic serving the pope, working diligently in the libraries. But at night he wrote tracts that ridiculed the Catholic system… This was a dangerous game. But Erasmus played it because he utterly despised the devilish pope.” [7]

A footnote said: “Much of the information in this section comes from the excellent research of Gail Riplinger’s In Awe of Thy Word (2003), Chapter 27.”

The term “excellent research” is meant to psyche the unwary reader. In fact, Gail Riplinger’s research is as “excellent” or reliable as National Enquirer, TMZ or any other gossip tabloid.

While Erasmus attacked the corruption and immorality among the clergy, he was a real Catholic to the end.

Erasmus was “a devoted worshipper of St. Anne” and he wrote “a collection of prayers to the Holy Virgin.” He believed in the Eucharist and upheld papal authority.

He pledged to always be “a faithful subject of the Holy See” and wrote: “Christ I know; Luther I know not. The Roman Church I know, and death will not part me from it till the Church departs from Christ.” [8]

He never recanted his beliefs.

If Chick and Daniels cared more about truth, their information should have come from Erasmus’ original works instead of a secondary work of a KJV Onlyist fraud.

By the way, if being an “undercover agent” was evil for Jim Jones or Kathryn Khulman, why was it acceptable for Erasmus?

6. This Give Us The Bible book – typical of Chick materials – devotes several pages to conspiracies and poisoning the well.

On page 137 is a cartoon of a Christian reading the NIV Bible and Satan holding his head saying: “Haw haw! GOTCHA!” The heading says, “CHRISTIANS NOW READ HIS BIBLE!”

This is meant to instill fear into readers to think those who read a modern Bible version are under Satan’s grip.

Page 125 shows a chart linking the NIV Bible to its Zondervan publisher (formerly owned by Harper Collins Inc.) and this links to the Satanic Bible and the News Corporation owned by Rupert Murdoch, a Catholic knight. This nothing but guilt by association.

It was intended to link the NIV with “the Catholic Church” or “The Satanic Bible” in the reader’s mind. If only the authors knew that Zondervan has published KJV Bibles, they would have probably refrained from such emotional manipulation in their book.

In the absence of solid facts to bolster their arguments, the authors resorted to inflaming emotions.

7. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines fiction as “something invented by the imagination or feigned; specifically an invented story.” It’s also called a fable or fabrication.

For instance, if a person today writes a story about Abraham in Ur, imputing words to the characters in the story, he has written a work of fiction.

In the illustrated book published by Chick Publications, Babylon Religion, the first chapter gives us a detailed account of before and after the Flood, including the words and thoughts of the characters. On page 16, Satan soliloquized:

One of Noah’s sons has got to be the weakest link. I’ll find him and make him serve me!” He tells Cush: “Look, Cush, you don’t need this pressure. You’re a man. GO BUILD YOUR OWN CITY!” So Cush “built the tower of Babel … to unify the people under one religion.” [9]

When you compare this with Genesis 10:8-10 you can easily see that Chick and Daniels wrote from their own imaginations.

We are told: “Nimrod had hated Shem and all followers of God Almighty so he started to persecute them with the help of his secret police … Nimrod and his wife demanded human sacrifices, which were devoured by him and his priests.” [10]

On page 34 Shem charged: “Nimrod is pure evil! He must be stopped once and for all!” Then “he came to Babylon and with righteous anger sliced Nimrod into pieces. Everyone was caught off-guard. The priests went into hiding and his [Nimrod’s] false religion came to a standstill.”

There is no biblical or extra-biblical evidence that:

(a) Nimrod had a wife, much less Semiramis.

(b) Nimrod started a religion or was worshipped as a god.

(c) Shem had followers much less were persecuted.

(d) Shem murdered Nimrod.

In fact, there is no historical record of Nimrod; only a strong possibility that he is the same as the legendary Gilgamesh.

8. On page 40, Satan tells Nimrod’s widow, “Stick with me, Semiramis, and I will make you the Queen of heaven!” Holding up her baby to the Babylonians, Semiramis says: “Behold Nimrod, your slain and risen god!” (p. 41).

In reality, there is no trace of Semiramis in Sumerian or Babylonian records. The only Semiramis (which is a Greek name) known in history is Queen Sammu-ramat, wife of Samshi-Adad V of Assyria who ruled approximately 824-811 B.C.

A Babylonian priest, Berossus, (c. 3rd century B.C.) in his Babyloniaca, lists the kings of Babylon and makes a reference to Semiramis ruling in Assyria – not Babylon – after 812 BC. This date matches the period the historical Sammu-ramat lived. [11]

This proves Nimrod and Semiramis didn’t live in the same century. There is a gap of more than 1000 years between them.

No reference work – whether it’s the Encyclopedia Britannica, Jewish Encyclopedia or the World Book Encyclopedia – places Nimrod and Semiramis as contemporaries, let alone as a couple.

Page 52 says: “Ancient and modern writings are clear that Tammuz and Semiramis got married.”

False. Tammuz was a Sumerian deity. He is never described as a real person and never mentioned as the husband or son of Semiramis in any standard reference work.

Semiramis was not worshipped as a goddess and she is not Ishtar, Astarte or Inanna because these deities predate her. Even Daniels and Chick quote a work on page 198 saying:

The goddess Ashera was probably the oldest [Canaanite goddess]. As early as 1750 BC a Sumerian inscription refers to her as the wife of Anu, who can be identified as El, the father god of the Canaanite pantheon…” [12]

This disproves their basic theory on page 82 that “All goddesses were made from one woman [Semiramis].” These deities have been worshipped for centuries before Semiramis. All pagan goddesses are demons, not geographical mutations of a dead Assyrian queen!

Page 53 tells us: “As ‘Asshur’ Tammuz rode north and built four cities, including Nineveh.”

A footnote gives Genesis 10:11-12 as reference but vs. 22 says this Asshur was one of “the children of Shem”!

The plots between Semiramis and Tammuz illustrated between pages 52-59, were based on nothing but “ancient myths!” I remember been disappointed when I first read this book, because I had expected a scholarly work.

How sad that Mr Chick who has attacked the myths and fables of Roman Catholicism, Mormonism and Paganism has resorted to the same.

Personally, I will think twice before I allow my name be put on a Christian book filled with lies, shoddy research and “tales [Gr. mythos] artfully spurn” by pagans (2 Pet. 1:16). A soldier of the cross would rather starve than profit on falsehood.

I know some of my readers will say, “But his works have brought many people to Christ.” I’m not disputing that, but we must not become so naive that we lose our understanding of Scripture’s warning:

“Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying…” (1 Tim. 1:4)

As Christians, we must not lose sight of the Biblical standard of honesty and integrity of character and we also need to watch out for this syndrome in our lives.

Notes

[1] Rebecca Brown and Rev. Daniel Yoder, Standing on the Rock, Solid Rock Enterprises, 2002, p. 64.

[2] Double Cross, Chick publications, 1981, pp. 9-11.

[3] Double p. 27

[4] The Godfathers, Chick, 1982, 31.

[5] Godfathers p. 4, 31; The Force (1983), p. 25; The Prophet (1988), pp. 12-23.

[6] David Daniels and Jack Chick, Did the Catholic Church Give us the Bible? Chick, 2005, p. 40.

[7] Did the Catholic Church, p. 67.

[8] Anthony Froud, Life and Letters of Erasmus, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1894 pp. 86, 279, 261.

[9] David Daniels and Jack Chick, Babylon Religion, Chick, 2006, pp. 20-21.

[10] Babylon Religion, pp. 32-33.

[11] “Berossus and Babylonian Eschatology” Iraq, 38.2 (Autumn 1976:171-173) p. 172.

[12] Anne Baring and Cashford Jules, Myth of the Goddess, Penguin Books, 1991, p. 454.