Who wrote the bible?

Bismillahir Rahmaanir Raheem

The wrote the bible - the greatest "WHODUNIT" of all time..



The following is part one of what is possibly the most important topic that I have found. It's claims are easily verified and the writing is easy to read. It does not stand in favour of or against the bible but simply states the facts. I'd like to do the same. Pelase set aside a good few minutes if this is a subject you are intersted in. Although I will be posting ALL parts of this discussion, you may visit the authors to view the other parts.

Note: this article is a total TRIP in history and theology- it deserves time to be propperly read through.

All credit  for the writing is given to: http://www.straightdope.com a non-denominational and educative site that offers information on a myriad of topics. The pictures are my own insertions.

A Staff Report from the Straight Dope Science Advisory Board

 

Who wrote the Bible? (Part 1)

January 7, 2002

Dear Straight Dope:

Who wrote the Bible? I hear the Catholics did some pretty heavy editorializing back in 300 A.D. or so. But where does the original text trace its origins to?

— Concerned Pagan

The answer is neither simple nor straightforward--just the way we at the Straight Dope like it. But this subject is complicated even for us. Rather than try to pack the answer into one article, we've decided to split it into sections and give a detailed account, to be presented over several days.

• Part 1 - Who wrote/compiled/edited (and when) the first five books of the Bible, called the Torah or Pentateuch or Five Books of Moses?

These reports were written bySDSTAFF Eutychus andSDSTAFF Dex, with valuable assistance from Straight Dope Message Board contributors tomndebb and CMKeller, and also from Dex's friend Pastor Allan, who has a Ph.D. in early Christian writings. Volumes have been written about this topic--the Cambridge History of the Bible alone is three large books. The answers are seldom clear cut. The best we could do is summarize and condense. We hope you enjoy.

Now to the first part of our story. Who wrote/compiled/edited (and when) the first five books of the Bible, called the Torah or the Pentateuch or the Five Books of Moses?

The five scrolls or books of the Pentateuch tell the history of the Israelites from the creation of the universe, through the exodus from Egypt and the revelation at Mount Sinai to their entry into the Promised Land. The first book, Genesis, contains most of the stories--the creation, Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, and Noah; and the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, etc., ending with the story of Joseph and the arrival of the Israelites in Egypt. The book of Exodus tells the story of the enslavement in Egypt, the exodus, the revelation of the Ten Commandments and the Law at Mount Sinai, the golden calf, and the construction of the Tabernacle (a portable house of worship, carried through the desert). The book of Numbers tells of the Israelites' wanderings in the desert and the legal and religious structure of their society. The book of Leviticus deals largely with the rules of the priesthood, sacrifice, and worship. The book of Deuteronomy is essentially Moses' farewell address to the Israelites as they are about to enter the Promised Land, recapping much of what was covered in the prior three books.

How did these books come to be written? There's a wide range of opinion. We'll only present the two most commonly held views--what we'll call the "traditional view" and the "scholarly view." This is perhaps misleading terminology, since there are many profound scholars on both sides. We use the term "scholarly" in the sense of "academic" or "scientific", although neither of those terms are right, either. Perhaps the best term is "documentarist", but that's cumbersome. So we shall stick to "traditional" and "scholarly", without implying lack of scholarship on the other side.

The traditional explanation is that the Five Books of Moses were written by Moses himself. There are several variants of this explanation:

• Traditional Judaism and fundamentalist Christianity believe that the text was dictated by God to Moses on Mount Sinai, letter for letter (or pretty much letter for letter).
• Other religious groups still ascribe authorship to Moses, but use words like "divinely inspired" rather than "dictated letter for letter."
• Still others say Moses was the sole author, but there's nothing "divine" about it except in the sense that all great works of literature and poetry are "inspired."

Mosaic authorship would mean the five books were written around 1280 to 1250 BC, the most commonly accepted range of dates for the exodus from Egypt, give or take 30 years.

It has long been recognized that there were a few problems with the traditional view of Moses as author. The text reports the death of Moses--how could Moses have written of his own death? It also describes Moses as "the most humble man who ever lived"--how could Moses write that about himself? But these are minor issues. Some say Moses' successor Joshua wrote the few lines that describe the death of Moses; others say that Moses himself was commanded to write that text before it happened. None of this represents a serious challenge to Mosaic authorship.

A listing of a FEW of the translations available, and from each of these have emerged many christian churches with many different takes of how to live as a christian.

As time went on, however, scholars became increasingly skeptical of the idea of Moses as single author. Among their objections:

• Several stories are repeated, with different characters or different emphasis (called "doublets"). For instance, there are two creation stories (Gen 1 and Gen 2). There are three stories of a patriarch traveling among pagans and pretending his wife is his sister. There are two stories of Moses striking a rock to produce water. There are two versions of the Ten Commandments (one in Exodus, one that Moses recaps in Deuteronomy) with slightly different wording. There are, in fact, a lot of these doublets.
• There are internal inconsistencies. The number of days of the Flood story don't add up right. At one point, Noah takes two of each animal; at another point, he takes two of some, seven of others. Joseph is sold into slavery to Ishmaelites in one verse, to Midianites a few verses later. The Mountain of Revelation is sometimes called Sinai and sometimes Horeb. Moses' father-in-law is sometimes called Yitro and sometimes Ruel, and so on.

Scholars in late 18th century Germany noted that in most of the duplicated stories, one set described God using the Hebrew word Elohim (usually translated "God") while the other set tended to use God's four-lettered Name Y-H-W-H (usually translated "Lord," sometimes miscalled "Jehovah.") This gave rise to the theory that there were two different authors, one called E and one called J (German for Y), whose works were somehow combined to form a single text.

Later analysis of the grammar, vocabulary, and writing style provided evidence for two other authors--called P for the Priestly author (mostly Leviticus, and lots of the genealogy) and D for the Deuteronomist, since the book of Deuteronomy seemed different (grammatically and politically) from the earlier books. The multiple-author view has come to be called the "Documentary theory."

We interject at this point to say that traditionalists have answers to all the points raised by Documentary scholars. The E-word for God is used when God's justice is predominant; the J-name is used when God's mercy is predominate. The doublet stories are complementary, offering different interpretations and insights. For example, each of the creation stories has a different emphasis, one on the physical universe and one on the pre-eminence of mankind. Textual differences (such as in the different versions of the Ten Commandments) make a point by comparison. For example, "Remember the Sabbath" and "honor the Sabbath" means to do both.

Another version of the bible, "flavoured" for New Age supporters.

 

Documentary theorists see a much more complicated story, with four different texts by four different authors (although some think "schools" of authors might be responsible for each text rather than a single author). These were later combined by an editor, called the Redactor. (my note - but NOBODY knows who that is.. so who are the people following who follow today's old testament?)  The Redactor sometimes put the different authors' stories one after the other (as with the creation stories) and sometimes interwove them (as with the two stories of Noah's Flood and of Joseph's mistreatment by his brothers). The Redactor also added comments like "Now it came to pass, after these things . . ." as a transition between sections.

Scholars differ on when the various authors wrote and when the Redaction occurred. No one today knows who the initial authors were--the predominant view is that many of the stories were handed down orally for generations before being written down. It's not clear which texts are older (although the Song at the Sea in Exodus 15:1-8 is usually acknowledged as among the oldest verses), or which author wrote which verses. Nor is there agreement on the gender of the authors. Some scholars believe the J-writer was a woman, as described in The Book of J by David Rosenberg and Harold Bloom (1990).

Our favorite interpretation of the Documentary theory is presented by Richard E. Friedman in his book, "Who Wrote the Bible?" It's a marvelous book, written for the lay person, and you feel like you're reading a detective story as Friedman disentangles various threads and ties the authorship to historical events. Friedman's version is summarized below (most dates are rough approximations).
 

1250 to 1000 BC - Conquest of the land of Canaan begins before 1200, and the tribes of Israel form a loose confederation. The histories of the tribes of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and Moses are told orally, handed down from generation to generation.

Around 1000 to 950 BC - The tribes are united under King David. Many of the stories are written down by the author J. These stories describe the creation of the universe, the birth and history of the tribes and their special relationship with God. The stories have an intense focus on morality, on examples of behavior, reward and punishment. Even the ancestral heroes are depicted as having human faults and weaknesses.

920 BC to 722 BC - following the death of Solomon (around 920 BC), the kingdom splits in two, Judah in the south with the royal capital at Jerusalem, and Israel/Ephraim in the north with major shrines at Shechem and Bethel. The J-stories primarily reflect the Davidic (southern) point of view. In the north, some stories begin to accumulate twists reflecting the political situation there. The stories from the south stress the importance of Jerusalem, Aaron and the priesthood, and the centralization of sacrifice. Those from the north are about sacrifices conducted anywhere and de-emphasize Aaron in favor of Moses.
 

The essence of the stories remains the same but the details vary. In the north, the mountain of significance is Horeb, not Sinai, and greater emphasis is placed on Joseph, his mother, and his son Ephraim (one of the largest of the northern tribes). In the southern version, Judah (head of the chief tribe of the south) saves Joseph from being killed by the other brothers; in the northern version, it's Reuben (head of the chief tribe of the north.)

The northern stories--let's call them E-stories--are written down and become the E-document. Northern prophets such as Amos (2:9) and Hosea (12:2-6) use the E-stories in their messages to the people. By the eighth century BC, then, we have two sets of stories, E-versions (northern) and J-versions (southern), both evolved from a single tradition.

722 BC - Israel is conquered by Assyria and the ten tribes of the north are scattered and exiled. Many refugees flee to Judah in the south. Although they are all Israelites, those from the north have somewhat different versions of stories from those in the south. Both texts are viewed as ancient and sacred, so someone combines the two to form a single document, called JE. As they're sitting around hearing the consolidated story read, the people from the north hear familiar phrases and elements and say, yep, that's the story my grandpa told me, all right. The people from the south, ditto. The combined text helps the process of social integration and tribal distinctions disappear.

The JE version subordinates the E-stories to the J-stories, since Judah (the southern kingdom) was politically dominant. Some of the E-stories may have been lost at this time--there aren't separate versions of all the stories. Perhaps in some cases there weren't any differences. Perhaps the southern authors who combined the stories dropped northern variants they couldn't accept. We don't know, and some say the absence of a complete E-document is a weakness in the Documentary theory.

770 BC to 600 BC - A third work appears, mostly concerned with Temple rites, sacrifices, priestly garb, genealogy (focused on the priestly tribe), etc. This is identified as the P-document. The P-stories in all likelihood are very old and handed down from oral tradition. Arguably many of them were compiled as a pro-Aaron response to the anti-Aaron slant of E. Where JE mentions God speaking to Moses, P mentions God speaking to Moses and Aaron. Where JE talks of the staff of Moses, P talks of the staff of Aaron. P accounts for the largest amount of text in the Torah, containing most of the legal sections, rules of sacrifice, genealogies, and priestly matters.

The dating of the P document is hotly debated among Documentary scholars. Some date P as late as Second Temple times (after 580 BC), but we find Friedman's argument compelling, that it appeared in response to JE.
 

640 BC to 609 BC - Reign of King Josiah. The book of II Kings describes (23:8-13) how a "lost" scroll of Moses was found by Halkiah around 622 BC and read to King Josiah. Most scholars argue (based on internal evidence) that this was the book of Deuteronomy--in fact, this was suggested by the early Church fathers, including Jerome. (Traditionalists usually say the entire written Torah had been lost, the people had strayed so far.) Deuteronomy largely recapitulates the other books, but also contains new material. The Documentary theory labels this last author D, the Deuteronomist.

The content of Deuteronomy is very old, although the literary style seems to be from the later period of Josiah. The D-author, in attributing the writings to Moses himself, certainly felt he was simply reviving Moses' teachings, as understood 600 years later. In much the same way a modern biographer might put together a collection of the sayings of Thomas Jefferson for a modern audience.

So at this point, there are three different texts: JE, P, and D. There were doubtless other texts as well (Genesis makes reference to the "Book of the Wars of the Lord," for example) which are long lost.

587 BC to 536? BC - The southern kingdom of Judah is conquered by Babylon in 587 BC. The people are exiled for 50 years, then return to Jerusalem to rebuild the Temple and restore their religion. There is no longer a king of the line of David, but a high priest. The process is not easy. Other exiled peoples were assimilated by their conquerors and disappeared; the Israelites remained faithful to their homeland and their God. But the religion had been weakened by the exile, and needed to be strengthened and consolidated. (yet again...some changes - my note)
 
 

Approximately 450 BC - This is perhaps the most remarkable part of the story, as the Redactor emerges on the scene. He  (WHO IS THAT??! my note)sees the need for religious revival and renewal, for strengthening and centralization. So he combines the three documents (JE, P, and D) into one smooth flowing narrative--the five books of Moses.

The Redactor did lots of cutting and pasting. Genealogies that probably started all together in a P-text were interspersed throughout JE, acting as bridging material or section dividers. Materials that told the same story from pro-Aaron and anti-Aaron viewpoints (for example) were neatly woven together.

The Redactor was respectful of his sources and kept them largely intact (largely.. hmm- my note). These were all sacred and ancient texts/traditions, so the Redactor presumably didn't drop material--duplication was preferable to omission. Sometimes he combined the different texts; sometimes he left the two stories side by side.

The single document became the center of the Israelite religion, under the prophets Ezra and Nehemiah. Authorship was ascribed to Moses. This wasn't deception. The Redactor in all likelihood knew nothing of the prior 500 year history of authorship and honestly believed the material he was editing had all been handed down from Moses. (Come on, now, you have to be giggling by now!! -my note) 

From 450 BC on the document was fixed--no more changes. The oldest existing parchments, the Dead Sea scrolls, date from around 100 BC. They're almost word-for-word identical to the versions we have today (although there are occasional transcription errors, most so small they would be noticed only by an experienced scholar). (my note - so a question arises - why do the christian bibles, totalling more than 28000 versions contain changes? - another question - if the Quran states that the original texts were changed, is this not proof so far that the Quran is telling us the truth?)

That's the story as viewed by Friedman, and we venture to say it comes closest to representing the consensus among Documentary scholars. We like Friedman's approach because he neatly connects the political history (as described in the text and as known to archaeology) with the religious and social history. He also draws on the grammar and vocabulary of the different authors to form a coherent explanation of the text's evolution.

Some Documentary scholars advocate different time lines. All agree on the four basic authors (J, E, P, and D) (versus one Quran, and one author) but some separate D into D1 (around 600 BC) and D2 (around 550 BC). Some say that P is older than D, some put E as oldest, some date all the documents much later. Archaeological finds occasionally shed some light (for instance, on the question of "household gods" in Genesis 31:19), helping to date the origin of a story or a phrase. But for the most part there's no firm evidence for one view over another. It's mostly a matter of trying to analyze internal elements such as writing style, vocabulary, and grammar--a highly subjective business. Arguments are waged over which author wrote which sentence.

Questions of provenance notwithstanding, the text is one of the great works of literature. It has endured for at least 2,500 years, parts of it for at least 3,200 years, and is still read today. There is hardly a work of art or writing in the western world that does not build from the five books or use images or phrases from them. Our notions of good and evil, of history as a linear process, of the relationship between the individual and morality, of the dignity of man ("created in the image of God"), all stem from this seminal work. The pagan nations surrounding Israel did not see anything wrong with mistreatment of animals, with leaving unwanted babies out in the woods, with working slaves without relief. The famous legal code of Hammurabi, often cited as a source for the laws of the Torah, declared that chopping off a man's hand was suitable punishment for stealing a loaf of bread. The Torah says the punishment must be proportionate to the crime. (However, the Torah also did not stop the killing of young girls who were buried alive because they were born GIRLS. Islam stopped this. The Torah did not give woman any rights - ISLAM gave them this. My note.. )
 

It's hard for us to consider the profound impact of this text on human history without thinking that there was a divine hand in its authorship, whether the human author was one or many.

BIBLIOGRAPHY BELOW:

 

Resources:

Who Wrote the Bible? by Richard Elliot Friedman, 1987

Understanding the Old Testament, by Bernhard W. Anderson, 1986

The Art of Biblical Narrative, by Robert Alter, 1981

The Religion of Israel, by Yehezkel Kaufmann (trans: Moshe Greenberg), 1948

Surpassing Wonder, by Donald H. Akenson, 1998

— Dex and Eutychus

LOOK OUT FOR PART 2 - coming soon... as well as WHO WROTE THE QURAN (just because we know, have proof, and can verify the facts)..

Why say NO to Christmas?

Bismillahir Rahmaanir Raheem

It is the "Silly Season" and let's face it, it's no secret that christians are so divided among themselves that they cannot agree on even the most basic of principles from wether or not a woman can preach to wether a christmas tree is "scriptural". There's no need to re-invent the wheel and try to find the answers to various christmas related questions. So here's an article written by a christian to christians, regarding christmas. Erm... need I say more?


PLEASE NOTE: I do not advocate the beliefs the writer advocates, I include extracts of his article here, simply because it is well researched and basically shows how the bible itself speaks against "christmas"..

All rights of the extracts of this article to its author David C Pack .

"Catholic Encyclopedia, 1911 edition, under “Christmas”: “Christmas was not among the earliest festivals of the Church…the first evidence of the feast is from Egypt.” Further, “Pagan customs centering around the January calends gravitated to Christmas.” Under “Natal Day,” Origen, an early Catholic writer, admitted, “…In the Scriptures, no one is recorded to have kept a feast or held a great banquet on his birthday. It is only sinners (like Pharaoh and Herod) who make great rejoicings over the day in which they were born into this world” (emphasis mine).

The Encyclopedia Americana, 1956 edition, adds, “Christmas…was not observed in the first centuries of the Christian church, since the Christian usage in general was to celebrate the death of remarkable persons rather than their birth…a feast was established in memory of this event [ Jesus's birth] in the fourth century. In the fifth century the Western Church ordered the feast to be celebrated forever on the day of the Mithraic rites of the birth of the sun and at the close of the Saturnalia, as no certain knowledge of the day of Christ's birth existed.”

It was 300 years after Christ before the Roman church kept Christmas, and not until the fifth century that it was mandated to be kept throughout the empire as an official festival honoring “Christ.”

Can "Christ" Be Honored by Christmas?

The most common justification that one will hear regarding Christmas is that people have replaced old pagan customs and intents by asserting that they are now “focusing on Christ.” I have heard many say that they are “honoring Christ” in their Christmas-keeping. The problem is that God does not say this is acceptable to Him! Actually, He plainly commands against it! Keeping Christmas dishonors Christ! He considers everything about it to be an abomination! We will soon see why.

"Christ" said, “But in vain they do worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Matt. 15:9). Christmas is not a command of God—it is a tradition of men. "Christ" continued, “Full well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your own tradition” (Mark 7:9). Every year, throughout the world, on December 25th, hundreds of millions do just that!

We will see that God plainly commands, “Follow not the way of the heathen.” But most people do not fear God, and He allows them to make their own decisions. Human beings are free moral agents—free to obey or disobey God! (...)

Was "Christ" Born on December 25th?

"Christ" was born in the fall of the year. Many have mistakenly believed He was born around the beginning of winter—December 25th! They are wrong! Notice the Adam Clarke Commentary, volume 5, page 370, New York edition: “It was custom among Jews to send out their sheep to the deserts about the Passover [early spring], and bring them home at the commencement of the first rain.” The first rains began in early-to-mid fall. Continuing with this same quote: “During the time they were out, the shepherds watched them night and day. As…the first rain began early in the month of March-esvan, which answers to part of our October and November [begins sometime in October], we find that the sheep were kept out in the open country during the whole summer. And as these shepherds had not yet brought home their flocks, it is a presumptive argument that October had not yet commenced, and that, consequently, (Jesus) was not born on the 25th of December, when no flocks were out in the fields; nor could He have been born later than September, as the flocks were still in the fields by night. On this very ground, the nativity in December should be given up. The feeding of the flocks by night in the fields is a chronological fact…See the quotations from the Talmudists in Lightfoot.”

Luke 2:8 explains that when "Christ" was born, “there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.” Note that they were “abiding” in the field. This never happened in December. Both Ezra 10:9-13 and the Song of Solomon 2:11 show that winter was the rainy season and shepherds could not stay on cold, open fields at night.

Numerous encyclopedias plainly state that "Christ" was not born on December 25th! The Catholic Encyclopedia directly confirms this. In all likelihood, "Christ" was born in the fall! A lengthy technical explanation would prove this point.

Since we now know that December 25th was nowhere near "Christ's" actual birthdate, where did the festival associated with this date come from?

Now read this quote under “Christmas”: “In the Roman world, the Saturnalia (December 17) was a time of merrymaking and exchanging of gifts. December 25 was also regarded as the birthdate of the Iranian mystery god Mithra, the Sun of Righteousness. On the Roman New Year (January 1), houses were decorated with greenery and lights, and gifts were given to children and the poor. To these observances were added the German and Celtic Yule rites when the Teutonic tribes penetrated into Gaul, Britain and central Europe. Food and good fellowship, the Yule log and Yule cakes, greenery and fir trees, gifts and greetings all commemorated different aspects of this festive season. (..)” (Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th ed., vol. II, p. 903).

A final quote about the selection of December 25th as the birthdate of "Christ" is necessary. Note an article in The Toronto Star, December 1984, by Alan Edmonds, entitled, “We owe a lot to Druids, Dutch”: “The Reformation cast a blight on Christmas. By then, of course, clever ecclesiastical politicians had adopted the Pagan mid-winter festival as the alleged birthdate of Jesus, of Nazareth, and thrown in a few other Pagan goodies to make their takeover more palatable.”

December 25th was not selected because it was the birth of "Christ" or because it was even near it. It was selected because it coincided with the idolatrous pagan festival Saturnalia—and this celebration must be carefully examined. In any event, we do not know the exact date of "Christ's" birth. (...)

What About Santa Claus?

Parents reason that they owe the whole Christmas myth to their children! Christmas traditions are focused primarily on kids, and they are certainly the center of most of what happens. I know because I kept seventeen Christmases. My older sister and younger brother and I were the recipients of much and the givers of very little on that day—and it all started with the Santa Claus lie.

Some years ago, a priest in New Jersey told his Sunday school class that Santa was a myth. The outrage from parents and his supervisors was swift. He had “killed Santa!” He had “destroyed family tradition!” He had “usurped family authority,” the article continued. He was officially censored by his superiors for being “overzealous and insensitive.”

His crime? He told the truth!

According to Langer's Encyclo-pedia of World History, (article “Santa”), “Santa” was a common name for Nimrod throughout Asia Minor. This was also the same fire god who came down the chimneys of the ancient pagans and the same fire god to whom infants were burned and eaten in human sacrifice among those who were once God's people.

Today Santa Claus comes from “Saint Nicholas.” Washington Irving, in 1809, is responsible for remaking the original old, stern bishop of this same name into the new “jolly St. Nick” in his Knickerbocker History of New York. (Most of the rest of America's Christmas traditions are even more recent than this.) “Old Nick” has long been recognized as a term for the devil.

In Revelation 2:6 and 15, we read about a “doctrine of the Nicolaitanes,” which Christ twice tells His Church “[He] hates.” Let's analyze the word Nicolaitane. It means “follower of Nicholas.” Nikos means “conqueror, destroyer.” Laos means “people.” Nicolaitanes, then, are people who follow the conqueror or destroyer—Nimrod. If you have believed that following Christmas is an innocent Christian custom, let this truth sink in!

Is It "Scriptural" to Exchange Gifts?

Merchants regularly report that over 60% of their annual retail sales occur during the Christmas shopping season. This represents a tremendous amount of gift buying. Most today believe that gift-giving comes from the Bible example of the “three wise men” (the Bible gives no number) presenting gifts to Christ. Is this true? Where did exchanging gifts come from, and what does God's Word say about it?

The Bibliotheca Sacra states, “The interchange of presents between friends is a like characteristic of Christmas and the Saturnalia, and must have been adopted by Christians from the pagans, as the admonition of Tertullian plainly shows” (Vol. 12, pp. 153-155).

Like every other aspect of Christmas, the shocking truth is that even this supposed Christian custom does not come from the Bible. It is an irony that people love to believe they are following the custom of the wise men giving to Christ, when actually they are giving almost exclusively to each other! What hypocrisy! Christ is completely forgotten.

The Bible actually teaches that Christians should not keep birthdays. Numerous scriptures make this principle clear. (...) However, what if you went to a birthday party that had been prepared for you and everybody gave gifts to each other and you were left out? The idea is ridiculous! If this happened, you would say that people were being selfish and forgetting you. In fact, most people give to others on Christmas merely because they expect to receive gifts themselves!

Let's briefly return to the “wise men” who gave gifts to Christ. The scripture describing this is Matthew 2:1-11: “Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, saying, Where is He that is born King of the Jews?…And when they were come into the house, they saw the young Child with Mary His mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto Him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh.”

It is commonly supposed that these were birthday presents for “baby Jesus.” But is this what the Bible actually says? Absolutely not! First, it is important to note that they did give the gifts to Jesus. They did not stand in his presence and exchange gifts among themselves or give them to others. The gifts were “presented unto Him.” Also, they arrived well after his “birthday.” This is another reason these could not have been “birthday presents.” (...)

Origin of the Christmas Tree

No article about Christmas is complete without some explanation of the “Christmas tree.” We have touched on it without directly focusing on it. The modern Christmas tree originated in Germany. But the Germans got it from the Romans, who got it from the Babylonians and the Egyptians.

The following demonstrates what the Babylonians believe about the origin of the Christmas tree: “An old Babylonish fable told of an evergreen tree which sprang out of a dead tree stump. The old stump symbolized the dead Nimrod, the new evergreen tree symbolized that Nimrod had come to life again in Tammuz! Among the Druids the oak was sacred, among the Egyptians it was the palm, and in Rome it was the fir, which was decorated with red berries during the Saturnalia!” (Walsh, Curiosities of Popular Customs, p. 242).

Frederick J. Haskin's Answers to Questions states, “The Christmas tree is from Egypt, and its origin dates from a period long anterior to the Christmas Era.” Did you know this—that the Christmas tree long preceded Christianity?

Most aspects of Christmas are not referred to in the Bible. Of course, the reason is that they are not from God (The reader should remember this article was written by a christian writer, not by the blogger yesimmuslimdealwithit) (...) The Christmas tree, however, is directly mentioned in the Bible! Turn to Jeremiah 10:2-5, “Thus says the Lord, Learn not the way of the heathen…For the customs of the people are vain: for one cuts 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. They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.”

This plain description of the modern Christmas tree is clear. (The bible )directly refers to it as “the way of the heathen.” Just as directly, He commands His people to “learn not the way of the heathen,” calling these customs “vain.” Verse 23 adds a remarkable and powerful statement: “O Lord, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walks to direct his [own] steps.” God must teach people how to live. Man simply cannot figure out God's ways for himself. (Note from yesImMuslimDealwithit - please read this again - Christians will tell muslims that they do not need laws because they are set free.. so no, I'm not agreeing with the writer in all he says, but I want readers to note what christians themselves say about christmas - their OWN bible denounces it.)

There is no room in Jeremiah 10 to believe, as some have tried to suggest, that because these trees are powerless of themselves, it is not really forbidden to have a Christmas tree. God condemns the putting up of pagan (Christmas) trees with this plain Bible command!

The Source of Holly Wreaths, Yule Logs and Mistletoe

The Encyclopedia Americana states, “The holly, the mistletoe, the Yule log…are relics of pre-Christian time.” In other words, paganism! The Yule log was commonly used in a rite of Teutonic nature worship.

Frederick Haskin further states, “The use of Christmas wreaths is believed by authorities to be traceable to the pagan customs of decorating buildings and places of worship at the feast which took place at the same time as Christmas.”

The Encyclopedia Britannica, under “Celastrales,” exposes the origin of the holly wreath: “European pagans brought holly sprays into their homes, offering them to the fairy people of the forests as refuge from the harsh winter weather. During the Saturnalia, the Roman winter festival, branches of holly were exchanged as tokens of friendship. The earliest Roman Christians apparently used holly as a decoration at the Christmas season.”

There are dozens of different types of holly. Virtually all of them come in male and female varieties—such as “Blue Prince and Blue Princess” or “Blue Boy and Blue Girl” or “China Boy and China Girl.” Female holly plants cannot have berries unless a nearby male plant pollinates them. It is easy to see why the holly wreath found its way into pagan rituals as a token of friendship and fertility!

Christmas is incomplete to many unless it involves “kissing under the mistletoe.” This pagan custom was natural on a night that involved much revelry done in the spirit of drunken orgies. Just like today, this “kissing” usually occurred at the beginning of any modern Saturnalia/Christmas celebration. I will never forget having to always kiss my friends' mothers upon entering each of their houses every Christmas. It was the first thing that we did. I hated it—but it was something I “had to do”! Mistletoe was considered to have special powers of healing for those who “reveled” under it.

The Encyclopedia Britannica, under “Santalales,” states, “The European mistletoe is thought to have had special ritual significance in Druidical ceremonies and lives in folklore today, its special status as the Christmas mistletoe having come from Anglo-Saxon times.” Mistletoe is a parasite that lives on oak trees. (Recall that the Druids worshipped in oak tree groves.) The ancient Celtics (associated with the Druids) used to give mistletoe as an herbal remedy to barren animals to make them fertile. It is still referred to as “all healer” in Celtic. (Yesimmuslimdealwithit comment - and yes, it is a medicinal herb, but it should not be used for any spiritual purpose for only ALLAH heals!)

Like mistletoe, holly berries were also thought to be sacred to the sun god. The original “sun log” came to be called the yule log. “Yule” simply means “wheel,” which has long been a pagan representation of the sun. No wonder people today commonly speak of the “sacred yule-tide season.”

What Should You Do?

Finally, let's examine what God told His people they should do and the way they ought to teach their children.

Human beings do not want to obey God (Rom. 8:7). They would rather follow their own “imagination.” They do not understand that God wants their lives to go “well.” He wants happiness, joy and blessings to flow into people's lives. All these are the results of obeying Him.

God inspired Moses to warn parents of the grave responsibility that they have in what and how they teach their children. Notice His instruction in Deuteronomy 6:1, 6-7, 20-21, 25: “Now these are the commandments…which the Lord your God commanded to teach you, that you might do them in the land where you go to possess it…And these words, which I command you this day, shall be in your heart: And you shall teach them diligently unto your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise up…And when your son asks you in time to come, saying, What mean the testimonies, and the statutes, and the judgments, which the Lord our God has commanded you? Then you shall say unto your son, We were Pharaoh's bondmen in Egypt; and the Lord brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand…And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the Lord our God, as He has commanded us.”

God took Israel out of Egypt—out of the customs of the world around them and revealed His Law to them. He does not want His people going back to the traditions, customs and ways from which He has called them. (note by yesimmuslimdealwithit - the writer sounds like a muslim, doesn't he? After all, he's basically saying one should submit to the laws of Allah, as written in the thorah, right? Submission to Allah's will, to the will of God, has a name - its translated in arabic as "ISLAM".)

When all of the interconnected traditions, filled with the symbolism of worshipping an ancient pagan, humanly devised god, are taught, this is not worshipping the true Creator.

The prophet Isaiah was inspired to write, “Cry aloud, spare not, lift up your voice like a trumpet, and show My people their transgression” (58:1). I have done this.

Notes from yesimmuslimdealwithit - why would the writer weep for the transgressions of the christians, aren't christians free from all transgressions because of "the cross"  - oh wait - the cross is also a pagan symbol - !!
Wether you are christian or not, christmas is not. Wether you are christian or not, you should not be hanging up christmas trees, exchanging gifts or participating in anything remotely christmassy. May our muslim brothers and sisters who participate "FOR THE FUN OF IT" take heed - Shirk is not a game, and since christmas is actually orignated in PAGAN and IDOLATROUS beliefs, is it not, then, idolatry? May Allah guide us all, and grant us the truth, always, for truly if the christians believed that the truth would set them free, they would seek the truth. CONVENIENCE is not the same as faith.

786 Movie

Bismillahir Rahmaanir Raheem

When a film about the life of Jesus (Essa as) was placed on the circuit, it portrayed Jesus (pbuh) as a gentle, kind, loving, saintly man - more even, it portrayed him as the bible portrays him. And even so, there were certain religious groups who took great offense, saying that the Jews were portrayed badly. Never mind the fact that it was all "true" since the movie conformed to what most of the scriptures in the bible say..

No-one was outraged at the Jewish outcry. Mel Gibson took a lot of flack for participating in this film, and still does today. Christians the world over stood up for their "movie" and that was seen as laudable and yet the jews were "understood" in their feelings and in some instances this multibillion dollar movie was stopped.

But along comes a "mystery director" and makes a film based on NO facts, with the pure intent of mocking and denegrating the Prophet (pbuh) of a faith which so many have called a man of integrity and grace. (See a previous post, or read a Quran if in doubt) and suddenly its "wrong" when muslims protect. When they are not heard, some (rightly or wrongly) are so incensed at the lack of action that they take matters in their own hands. I'm not saying that is right, either, but WHAT WILL IT TAKE for people to simply respect one another?

I ask the christians out there to look at their arms - many of them wearing "what would Jesus do" bracelets. Even if you do not believe in the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) would Jesus (Essa as) promote the character assination of ANYONE?

It seems as if muslims just can't seem to obtain any level of respect nowadays - ALL we want to do is pray 5 times a day, go on Hajj and keep our fast and our faith. It seems the rights of everyone are attended to - the rights of gays, the rights of transexuals, the rights of races, the rights of every religion - but when it comes to Islam, suddenly its okay to mock, to contrive such corrupted lies as 9/11 and sell this as an "Islamic attack" - and now, it seems okay for Google to keep this movie on You Tube which denegrades someone who Ghandi himself said is one of the greatest men who ever lived!

I wonder what the ZIONISTS would do if such a movie were made of Moses (peace be upon him). I wonder what the christians would do if such a movie were made of Jesus (peace be upon him). I wonder why its okay for the world to accept this crap about ISLAM.

It's certainly great advertising for You Tube, great advertising for google - what the billions aren't enough, they now need to go forth and promote the denegration of a holy man? It's kinda like the Bully on the playground muscling in on the guy who's sitting quietly saying a prayer, and the rest of the kids looking on and laughing or doing NOTHING.

Shame on you! Shame on the maker, shame on Google for allowing this garbage, shame on those with ANY faith who want theirs respected but won't bat an eyelid when Islam is attacked this way.

Shame on you. Maker of this film, and silent "sheep" who don't even bleat when injustice occurs. Shame on you. If you sleep well now, and you have any faith in you, then you must know that you won't sleep well forever, because there is a judgement day in your bible, in your holy books, and that day will come when all of us least expect it. Not at the hand of a muslim, not by the means of anything man can contrive muslim or otherwise - But as sure as the sun rises God will ask you "what did you do when you saw this injustice towards a man who taught only SUBMIT TO GOD" Because HE WILL ASK -  and we will, all of us, be listening to the answer..


SHAME on you.

La Illaha Il Allah, Muhammad u Rasoolulah. There is no God but ONE GOD, and Muhammad is his final messenger. This is a statement of faith. When I die someday, when you die someday, all you will have is your statement of faith. Faith without actions, is DEAD.. How will you answer on that day?

SHAME on you!

Who demolished the towers, and why?

Bismillahir Rahmaanir Raheem.

There's a lot of questions left to have answered about 9/11. Visit http://911research.wtc7.net

The truth is out there.. sooner or later someone will find it, insh'Allah. The question is, will enough anti-islamic feeling have been generated by then to close the minds to the truth of the peacefulness of this faith and this deen.

Insh'Allah not - Insh'Allah  it will never be too late for the beauty of Islam to be seen..

Ameen.