Christmas

pandamonk · Dec 18, 2005

Is Christmas really Christian?

Austin Cline said:
[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Date:
December 25 [/font]
[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Definition:
The festival of Christmas gets its name from the term Christ's Mass, or a mass performed in honor of Christ. It is at this time that Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Dating:
The exact dating of Christmas has been a subject of great debate and disagreement, although tradition and custom has it affixed now to December 25th. This date has little to do with actual Christian history and much to do with attempts by Christians to appeal to potential pagan converts by appropriating their own festivals of Saturnalia and Brumalia. Indeed, the earliest calendars to even list December 25 as Christmas do not appear until 336 CE. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]There is no hint in the Gospels about the time of the year when Jesus is supposed to have been born - except that it couldn't have been midwinter, because in that part of the world this is the rainy season and shepherds would not be out at night. This means that early Christianity found itself in the odd position of trying to tell everyone about what they claimed was the most tremendous birth ever without being able to say when it happened. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Birthdays:
The very attempt to celebrate the birth of Christ has always been questionable in Christianity. Such festivals were a common feature among pagan religions and, as a result, it was hotly debated whether or not Christians should emulate the practice and risk being less Christian as a consequence. The Church father Origin even argued the Christians should refrain from celebrating birthdays at all because scriptures portray evil people like Herod and the pharaohs as doing the same. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Pre-Christian Traditions
It is entirely coincidental that in 274 CE, when the winter solstice fell on December 25th, pagan emperor Aurelian proclaimed this day as Natalis Solis Invicti, the festival of the birth of the invincible sun. Throughout pagan Europe, Christianity was known for supplanting pagan celebrations and holy places in an effort to speed conversion, and it is easy to see this as another example of the same. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]But there was more involved than just the date. Pagan Rome at this time of year was deeply involved with celebrations. It was the important festival of the old vegetation-god Saturn who (as a god) died or was displaced by Jupiter, the sky-god (depending on how you looked at things). For an entire week, from December 17th to 24th, no work was done and the only law was for everyone to be in good cheer. And, of course, the exchanging of gifts played an important role. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]It is important to note the fact that celebrating the memory of a person on the day of their birth isn't normal to Christianity. Typically, a saint's "day" is placed on the date of their supposed death - and in the early days, their martyrdom. It was in the pagan and especially in the Roman world where celebrations on the anniversary of a person's birth is more likely to be found. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]We shouldn't forget the heavy Germanic element - the nations of the north also had their greatest festivals of the year in mid-winter. Evergreen trees and holly became important symbols, because they tenaciously held on to their green colors despite the harshest winters. It is thus from these Nordic traditions that we get the use of an evergreen Christmas tree and decking the halls with holly. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Another important Nordic tradition was the Yule Log. The origins of the word yule seem to be somewhat in dispute, but one lineage traces it back to the name of the chief Germanic deity Yolnir, called Jol in Old Norse and Geol in Old English. In his name people celebrated a 12-day festival of eating, drinking, and general merriment. Curiously, Yolnir (later named Wodan and later still Odin) is described in one legend as hanging himself on a tree and piercing himself with a spear, suffering through nine nights. At the end, he drinks some mead and cries out the runes of the Norse alphabet (thus their origin). [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Christian Traditions
The most important Christian aspect to modern celebrations of Christmas is probably the figure of Santa Claus. This character can be traced back to Saint Nicholas, a patron saint of children on whose day (December 6th), gifts were traditionally given to kids. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Nicholas was the bishop of Myra in Lycia (in Turkey) at some point before 350 CE. Nothing outside of legends is really known about him anymore, but the most persistent symbolism for him is his devotion to children. The American association between him and presents stems from the Dutch, who still give gifts to kids on his feast day. The American "Santa Claus" appears to be a mispronunciation of the Dutch "Sinter Klaas," colloquial for Saint Nicholas. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Beyond the idea that this is the day that people are supposed to be celebrating the birth of Jesus, there just isn't much else that Christianity has directly contributed. This is acknowledged by many Christians, and some denominations don't celebrate Christmas at all, regarding it as little more than a dressed-up pagan holiday. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Problems with Celebrations
Today the celebration of Christmas is so ubiquitous that people have trouble imagining large segments of society not celebrating Christmas or even objecting to its celebration - but that was the situation not too long ago. Many people are simply unaware of the fact that, in the English speaking world, Christmas was very nearly killed off by Protestant "fundamentalists" - Puritans who objected to Christmas so much that, wherever they held power, they passed laws banning it. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]The Scottish Presbyterian Church banned it in 1583 and James I had to reinstitute it by force of arms. Such bans did not go without protest - in 1644 thousands rioted in England against the Christmas prohibitions enacted by Cromwell and his followers. For example, Chrimast was declared to be a day of fasting and penance, not a day of revelry and celebration. Even after they lost power, they had succeeded in getting people out of the habit of celebrating, effectively breaking the tradition of Christmas. After the Restoration, people treated Christmas with a great deal of indifference and without much in the way of religious reverence. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Puritans in the early American colonies banned the celebration of Christmas, not simply because of the lack of scriptural support for such a festival, but also because it tended to be associated with drunkenness and rowdy behavior. In 1659, the Massachusetts Bay Colony passed a strict law against the observation of Christmas as a holiday: [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Whosoever shall be found observing any such day as Christmas as the like, either by forbearing labor, feasting, or any other way upon such account as aforesaid, every such person so offending shall pay for each offense five shillings as a fine to the country [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Even as late as 1706 a Puritan mob surrounded an Anglican church where Christmas services were being held. Today, few Christian groups adhere to this thinking, with the largest example being the Jehovah's Witnesses. Other smaller groups like the Worldwide Church of God and Christian Science have adopted a similar position. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]In their book 'The Making of the Modern Christmas, J.M. Golby and A.W. Purdue examined the December issues of The Times from 1790 to 1835. Would you believe that in twenty of those forty-five years, they found no mention of Christmas? And when Christmas was mentioned, it received only the scantest of attention - nobody really cared. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Even into the late 1800's, Christmas was not a generally popular holiday, nor was it an officially recognized state holiday. It wasn't such an odd thing, then, that Scrooge might require poor Cratchit to work on Christmas day - even the US Congress seems to have met on some Christmas days in the nineteenth century.

[/font]

pandamonk · Dec 18, 2005

Austin Cline said:
[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Post-Christian Traditions
It might seem odd to refer to "post-Christian" traditions when Christianity is still with us, but by this term I mean traditions and ideas which may have occurred within the context of a Christian culture, but which are not founded directly upon Christian theology - in particular, the very central issue of Jesus' birth. What we are looking at here are recent additions to the Christmas celebration which have the appearance of being very old and very traditional. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]A good source of information on the modern development of Christmas is Tom Flynn's The Trouble With Christmas - a very informative and entertaining challenge to common assumptions and beliefs. He describes how our contemporary Christmas is largely a creation of six famous Britons and Americans. He calls this group the DWAMQ's - five "Dead White Anglophone Males and a Queen." They are: Washington Irving, Charles Dickens, Queen Victoria, Clement C. Moore, Thomas Nast and Francis Church. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Washington Irving wrote a history of the Dutch influence and rule of New York which was often meant as satire, yet ended up being received as factual, and thus its influence grew. In this work, the Dutch figure of Saint Nicholas appears more than two dozen times and he makes it appear as if New Amsterdam was dominated by a cult which celebrated the figure of Saint Nick - the truth of which is historically undecided. And Irving returned more than once to the figure of Saint Nicholas, even writing about "old fashioned" Christmas celebrations which he simply made up. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Charles Dickens is a familiar literary figure and his contribution much more famous than Irving's. But while his work A Christmas Carol is obvious, it is not his only one. He seemed obsessive about the holiday, and more than once he depicted lavish Christmas feasts rife with "old fashioned" traditions which were little more than literary creations. But people followed right along, enchanted with the atmosphere he created and wishing to capture it for themselves. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]It is odd and unfortunate that this story created the caricature of a "Scrooge" who does not celebrate Christmas. As mentioned earlier, the original audiences would not have held the same scorn for Scrooge as people do today - his attitude of neglecting Christmas was quite common. Consider for a moment the fact that he was only able to buy the large turkey for the Cratchit family because the butcher was open for business on Christmas day! But the harm has already been done, and it's unlikely that the negative image of Scrooge will change anytime soon. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Queen Victoria came from a German family and, unlike English families, she celebrated Christmas with a small decorated indoor tree. Then, as today, people obsessed over royalty, and they were particularly infatuated when their teenaged Queen ascended the throne. Then, as today, people wanted to be fashionable and adopt what their role models did - in this case, the tree tradition. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Clement Moore is credited with writing the poem The Night Before Christmas, although he had before been accused of not writing work which he claimed was his, and it is not clear that he was indeed the author in this case. At any rate, this piece almost singlehandedly created the modern American conception of who Santa Claus is, what he looks like and what he does. It also firmly entrenched other Christmas ideas, like the hanging of stockings by the fireplace. What might go unnoticed by many, but which is crucial here, is that this Santa Claus has been fully secularized. There is no reference to sainthood, to Christianity or to Jesus. Santa is given a pagan image - he is, after all, described as an elf. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Thomas Nast actually is responsible for having drawn the physical pictures of Santa Claus and giving people a common, shared vision of the main, secular symbol of an increasingly secular holiday. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Francis Church, an editorial writer of the New York Sun, is a name unfamiliar to many, but wrote the famous response to Virginia O'Hanlon's letter asking if there was really a Santa Claus. As Flynn describes this response, Church brought together "strands of Christian mysticism, nineteenth-century Transcendentalism and Romanticism, and general distrust of scientific skepticism." Essentially, what Church did was describe a coherent vision of what Christmas was supposed to be. He subtly replaces the literal Santa that children like Virginia believe in and ask about and replaces him with a metaphorical Santa representing a spirit of generosity and love. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Christmas Today
It was just after World War II that people complained about over-commercialization and started to try to "put Christ back into Christmas." But why at this point in history? Blame it on the war: during the conflict, people had to shop early in order to get Christmas gifts to the troops overseas in time. Merchants, of course, benefited from the early shopping and made a point of reminding people to shop early - but they never stopped. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]And so the lengthy holiday shopping season was born and it's been getting longer ever since. Over time people have learned to try and shop even earlier in order to beat the maddening holiday rush - and retailers, being the good public servants that they are, have sought to accommodate them with earlier and earlier holiday sales. By and large, the spirit of giving has become predicated upon a spirit of buying. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Such is our modern Christmas: a large number of ancient pagan traditions, a few pieces of Christian traditions, and then a large number of modern creations which are almost entirely secular in nature, no matter where they got their inspiration from. I see little room and little need for any "Christ" in all of this - but more importantly, I see little place where a "Christ" could be put back into the mix. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]So when you find someone talking about putting Christ back into Christmas, you can ask them what part Christ really played in Christmas to begin with. And if you are an atheist who doesn't celebrate Christmas in order to avoid Christianity, you may want to reconsider the decision. [/font]

[font=verdana, geneva, helvetica]Although you may not be interested in celebrating holidays with any religious trappings whatsoever, Christianity's hold on Christmas, from a religious perspective, is rather tenuous. If you'd like to enjoy the holiday, you should be able to do so without giving Christianity a second thought.

[/font]

may · Dec 19, 2005

good post ,so there we have it, the bible does not teach us to celebrate christmas

michel · Dec 19, 2005

may said:
good post ,so there we have it, the bible does not teach us to celebrate christmas

Whether or not "the Bible tells you so" Christmas is a Christian festival (Unless, of course you disagree with the Catholic Church) . This is in the same vein of 'The bible does not mention the word 'Trinity'; many Christians belive in the concept of the Trinity : to reitterate from a previous thread;
Deut provided a great link in a previous thread to:- http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03724b.htm;

A very short extract is as follows:- Maybe you would like to read the rest of that page, Christmas
ORIGIN OF THE WORD

The word for Christmas in late Old English is Cristes Maesse, the Mass of Christ, first found in 1038, and Cristes-messe, in 1131. In Dutch it is Kerst-misse, in Latin Dies Natalis, whence comes the French Noël, and Italian Il natale; in German Weihnachtsfest, from the preceeding sacred vigil. The term Yule is of disputed origin. It is unconnected with any word meaning "wheel". The name in Anglo-Saxon was geol, feast: geola, the name of a month (cf. Icelandic iol a feast in December).

You might also like to look at:- http://www.touchstonemag.com/docs/issues/16.10docs/16-10pg12.html, which James the Persian provided in a thread of his about the mistaken belef of the dating of Christmas being alluded to pagans............

[font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Calculating Christmas[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]William J. Tighe on the Story Behind December 25[/font]

Many Christians think that Christians celebrate Christs birth on December 25th
because the church fathers appropriated the date of a pagan festival. Almost no one minds, except for a few groups on the fringes of American Evangelicalism, who seem to think that this makes Christmas itself a pagan festival. But it is perhaps interesting to know that the choice of December 25th is the result of attempts among the earliest Christians to figure out the date of Jesus birth based on calendrical calculations that had nothing to do with pagan festivals.

Rather, the pagan festival of the Birth of the Unconquered Son instituted by the Roman Emperor Aurelian on 25 December 274, was almost certainly an attempt to create a pagan alternative to a date that was already of some significance to Roman Christians. Thus the pagan origins of Christmas is a myth without historical substance.

A Mistake

The idea that the date was taken from the pagans goes back to two scholars from the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. Paul Ernst Jablonski, a German Protestant, wished to show that the celebration of Christs birth on December 25th was one of the many pagan-izations of Christianity that the Church of the fourth century embraced, as one of many degenerations that transformed pure apostolic Christianity into Catholicism. Dom Jean Hardouin, a Benedictine monk, tried to show that the Catholic Church adopted pagan festivals for Christian purposes without paganizing the gospel.

In the Julian calendar, created in 45 b.c. under Julius Caesar, the winter solstice fell on December 25th, and it therefore seemed obvious to Jablonski and Hardouin that the day must have had a pagan significance before it had a Christian one. But in fact, the date had no religious significance in the Roman pagan festal calendar before Aurelians time, nor did the cult of the sun play a prominent role in Rome before him.

There were two temples of the sun in Rome, one of which (maintained by the clan into which Aurelian was born or adopted) celebrated its dedication festival on August 9th, the other of which celebrated its dedication festival on August 28th. But both of these cults fell into neglect in the second century, when eastern cults of the sun, such as Mithraism, began to win a following in Rome. And in any case, none of these cults, old or new, had festivals associated with solstices or equinoxes.

As things actually happened, Aurelian, who ruled from 270 until his assassination in 275, was hostile to Christianity and appears to have promoted the establishment of the festival of the Birth of the Unconquered Sun as a device to unify the various pagan cults of the Roman Empire around a commemoration of the annual rebirth of the sun. He led an empire that appeared to be collapsing in the face of internal unrest, rebellions in the provinces, economic decay, and repeated attacks from German tribes to the north and the Persian Empire to the east.

In creating the new feast, he intended the beginning of the lengthening of the daylight, and the arresting of the lengthening of darkness, on December 25th to be a symbol of the hoped-for rebirth, or perpetual rejuvenation, of the Roman Empire, resulting from the maintenance of the worship of the gods whose tutelage (the Romans thought) had brought Rome to greatness and world-rule. If it co-opted the Christian celebration, so much the better.

A By-Product

It is true that the first evidence of Christians celebrating December 25th as the date of the Lords nativity comes from Rome some years after Aurelian, in a.d. 336, but there is evidence from both the Greek East and the Latin West that Christians attempted to figure out the date of Christs birth long before they began to celebrate it liturgically, even in the second and third centuries. The evidence indicates, in fact, that the attribution of the date of December 25th was a by-product of attempts to determine when to celebrate his death and resurrection.

michel · Dec 19, 2005

Pt2.

How did this happen? There is a seeming contradiction between the date of the Lords death as given in the synoptic Gospels and in Johns Gospel. The synoptics would appear to place it on Passover Day (after the Lord had celebrated the Passover Meal on the preceding evening), and John on the Eve of Passover, just when the Passover lambs were being slaughtered in the Jerusalem Temple for the feast that was to ensue after sunset on that day.

Solving this problem involves answering the question of whether the Lords Last Supper was a Passover Meal, or a meal celebrated a day earlier, which we cannot enter into here. Suffice it to say that the early Church followed John rather than the synoptics, and thus believed that Christs death would have taken place on 14 Nisan, according to the Jewish lunar calendar. (Modern scholars agree, by the way, that the death of Christ could have taken place only in a.d. 30 or 33, as those two are the only years of that time when the eve of Passover could have fallen on a Friday, the possibilities being either 7 April 30 or 3 April 33.)

However, as the early Church was forcibly separated from Judaism, it entered into a world with different calendars, and had to devise its own time to celebrate the Lords Passion, not least so as to be independent of the rabbinic calculations of the date of Passover. Also, since the Jewish calendar was a lunar calendar consisting of twelve months of thirty days each, every few years a thirteenth month had to be added by a decree of the Sanhedrin to keep the calendar in synchronization with the equinoxes and solstices, as well as to prevent the seasons from straying into inappropriate months.

Apart from the difficulty Christians would have had in followingor perhaps even being accurately informed aboutthe dating of Passover in any given year, to follow a lunar calendar of their own devising would have set them at odds with both Jews and pagans, and very likely embroiled them in endless disputes among themselves. (The second century saw severe disputes about whether Pascha had always to fall on a Sunday or on whatever weekday followed two days after 14 Artemision/Nisan, but to have followed a lunar calendar would have made such problems much worse.)

These difficulties played out in different ways among the Greek Christians in the eastern part of the empire and the Latin Christians in the western part of it. Greek Christians seem to have wanted to find a date equivalent to 14 Nisan in their own solar calendar, and since Nisan was the month in which the spring equinox occurred, they chose the 14th day of Artemision, the month in which the spring equinox invariably fell in their own calendar. Around a.d. 300, the Greek calendar was superseded by the Roman calendar, and since the dates of the beginnings and endings of the months in these two systems did not coincide, 14 Artemision became April 6th.

In contrast, second-century Latin Christians in Rome and North Africa appear to have desired to establish the historical date on which the Lord Jesus died. By the time of Tertullian they had concluded that he died on Friday, 25 March 29. (As an aside, I will note that this is impossible: 25 March 29 was not a Friday, and Passover Eve in a.d. 29 did not fall on a Friday and was not on March 25th, or in March at all.)

Integral Age

So in the East we have April 6th, in the West, March 25th. At this point, we have to introduce a belief that seems to have been widespread in Judaism at the time of Christ, but which, as it is nowhere taught in the Bible, has completely fallen from the awareness of Christians. The idea is that of the integral age of the great Jewish prophets: the idea that the prophets of Israel died on the same dates as their birth or conception.

This notion is a key factor in understanding how some early Christians came to believe that December 25th is the date of Christs birth. The early Christians applied this idea to Jesus, so that March 25th and April 6th were not only the supposed dates of Christs death, but of his conception or birth as well. There is some fleeting evidence that at least some first- and second-century Christians thought of March 25th or April 6th as the date of Christs birth, but rather quickly the assignment of March 25th as the date of Christs conception prevailed.

It is to this day, commemorated almost universally among Christians as the Feast of the Annunciation, when the Archangel Gabriel brought the good tidings of a savior to the Virgin Mary, upon whose acquiescence the Eternal Word of God (Light of Light, True God of True God, begotten of the Father before all ages) forthwith became incarnate in her womb. What is the length of pregnancy? Nine months. Add nine months to March 25th and you get December 25th; add it to April 6th and you get January 6th. December 25th is Christmas, and January 6th is Epiphany.

Christmas (December 25th) is a feast of Western Christian origin. In Constantinople it appears to have been introduced in 379 or 380. From a sermon of St. John Chrysostom, at the time a renowned ascetic and preacher in his native Antioch, it appears that the feast was first celebrated there on 25 December 386. From these centers it spread throughout the Christian East, being adopted in Alexandria around 432 and in Jerusalem a century or more later. The Armenians, alone among ancient Christian churches, have never adopted it, and to this day celebrate Christs birth, manifestation to the magi, and baptism on January 6th.

Western churches, in turn, gradually adopted the January 6th Epiphany feast from the East, Rome doing so sometime between 366 and 394. But in the West, the feast was generally presented as the commemoration of the visit of the magi to the infant Christ, and as such, it was an important feast, but not one of the most important onesa striking contrast to its position in the East, where it remains the second most important festival of the church year, second only to Pascha (Easter).

In the East, Epiphany far outstrips Christmas. The reason is that the feast celebrates Christs baptism in the Jordan and the occasion on which the Voice of the Father and the Descent of the Spirit both manifested for the first time to mortal men the divinity of the Incarnate Christ and the Trinity of the Persons in the One Godhead.

A Christian Feast

Thus, December 25th as the date of the Christs birth appears to owe nothing whatsoever to pagan influences upon the practice of the Church during or after Constantines time. It is wholly unlikely to have been the actual date of Christs birth, but it arose entirely from the efforts of early Latin Christians to determine the historical date of Christs death.

And the pagan feast which the Emperor Aurelian instituted on that date in the year 274 was not only an effort to use the winter solstice to make a political statement, but also almost certainly an attempt to give a pagan significance to a date already of importance to Roman Christians. The Christians, in turn, could at a later date re-appropriate the pagan Birth of the Unconquered Sun to refer, on the occasion of the birth of Christ, to the rising of the Sun of Salvation or the Sun of Justice.

William J. Tighe, a Touchstone correspondent, is Associate Professor of History at Muhlenberg College. He refers interested readers to Thomas J. Talleys The Origins of the Liturgical Year (The Liturgical Press). A draft of this article appeared on the listserve Virtuosity. [font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]

[/font]

pandamonk · Dec 19, 2005

Saturnalia was around before Natalis Solis Invicti. It was held on 17 December and over the years, it expanded to a whole week, up to 23 December. The most important Christian aspect of modern Christmas is Santa Claus. This character is traced to Saint Nicholas, a patron saint of children on whose day (December 6th) gifts were given to kids. Beyond the idea that that people are supposed celebrate the birth of Jesus on this day, this is all that Christianity has directly contributed. Many Christians acknowledge this and some denominations dont celebrate Christmas at all, regarding it as little more than a dressed-up pagan holiday.

Scuba Pete · Dec 19, 2005

pandamonk said:
Many Christians acknowledge this and some denominations dont celebrate Christmas at all, regarding it as little more than a dressed-up pagan holiday.

You know,

It amazes me that churches who try and spread the gospel 364 days a year do not take this opportunity when the world is a bit more open to it's message! What harm is there to preach the word on the 365th day? Bwahahahahaha. It's like they are afraid of success!

may · Dec 19, 2005

NetDoc said:
You know,

It amazes me that churches who try and spread the gospel 364 days a year do not take this opportunity when the world is a bit more open to it's message! What harm is there to preach the word on the 365th day? Bwahahahahaha. It's like they are afraid of success!

Christmas has become packed with lies. Christians, however, are told at Revelation 22:15 that everyone liking and carrying on a lie will end up without the divine blessing of everlasting life, and yes true christians do preach the good news of the kingdom every day of the year. but every one to their own , true christians do not make a fuss about others celebrating chrismas its just that they dont take part in it themselves so its a matter of choice

Green Gaia · Dec 19, 2005

Is Christmas really Christian?

Yes and no.

BUDDY · Dec 19, 2005

The history of a celebration in the month of December has nothing to do with the modern day celebration of Christmas. What makes this holiday important is how people currently use and define it, not what it's definition and use was in the past. The current trend by some to falsify the christian celebration by bringing up a pagan history, is nothing more than an attempt to down play its importance in the mind of the christian, for no other reason than because some have a proclivity to upset them and force them to question their beliefs. IMHO

Green Gaia · Dec 19, 2005

EEWRED said:
The history of a celebration in the month of December has nothing to do with the modern day celebration of Christmas.

It does for some of us. But I do not think that acknowledging the historic and ancient roots of Christmas lessens it's meaning in any way for those who wish to celebrate it as modern Christians do.

Scuba Pete · Dec 19, 2005

may said:
true christians do not make a fuss about others celebrating chrismas its just that they dont take part in it themselves so its a matter of choice

Colossians 2:16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. NIV

This "true Christian" enjoys Christmas and the FOCUS that the world puts on Jesus for this one day. If you want to judge someone, please judge yourself!

may · Dec 19, 2005

NetDoc said:
Colossians 2:16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. NIV

This "true Christian" enjoys Christmas and the FOCUS that the world puts on Jesus for this one day. If you want to judge someone, please judge yourself!

the verse you quoted is refering to the celebrations that true christians no longer took part in , because when they became christians they no longer did them, but as i said everyone does what they will , who am i to judge what others do ,as long as i myself are not taking part my concience is clear , that is how i personally feel but you do not thats ok ,feel free i am not judging anyone its just how i feel myself.

Scuba Pete · Dec 19, 2005

I fully disagree. Take Paul's take on the situation:

I Corinthians 9:19 Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. 23 I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings. NIV

How does one do this, without honoring their traditions? They can't! It's only when traditions REPLACE God's will that become evil. How can a festival that puts the gospel in a white hot spot light be evil? Probably when it disagrees with YOU. Other than that, I find nothing in the Scriptures that condemn it. Feel free to share any that you have.

muichimotsu · Dec 19, 2005

This all depends on how you view God and how he judges people having freewill, however you define that and how that relates to religious truth, morality, etc. Me personally, as long as you don't make a holiday more important than the others celebrated at the same time just because it appeals to your faith. If you know about Channukah, then hang out with Jews once in a while and with every other tradition, learn as much as you feel you need to in order to respect people' s traditions. Just because a person believes strongly doesn't necessarily make it against God's will, for no one can truly know the will of a being beyond our comprehension, can they?

may · Dec 20, 2005

NetDoc said:
I fully disagree. Take Paul's take on the situation:

I Corinthians 9:19 Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. 23 I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings. NIV

How does one do this, without honoring their traditions? They can't! It's only when traditions REPLACE God's will that become evil. How can a festival that puts the gospel in a white hot spot light be evil? Probably when it disagrees with YOU. Other than that, I find nothing in the Scriptures that condemn it. Feel free to share any that you have.

No question about it, the apostle Paul knew how to put himself in the other fellows place.1 Cor. 9:19-22.

Being able to put ourself in the other fellows place keeps us from offending others needlessly but it does not mean that he partook of things no longer needed.yes his aim was to save some

He knew that if he were indifferent to the way others thought and felt he would needlessly offend them, for it is very easy to imply that others, whom you believe to be mistaken, are either lacking in sincerity or in intelligence. He made himself, as it were, the slave to all, that he might gain the most persons. And so, he said, to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain Jews . . . To the weak I became weak, that I might gain the weak. I have become all things to people of all sorts, that I might by all means save some.

Xzist · Dec 20, 2005

How can a christian live a christian life without following the instructions given by christ? No where.... in our instructions does it tell us.... how or when to celebrate the birth of christ. Christ mentioned doing one thing in rememberence of him. And that one thing was the lords supper. The bible is truth.. if we have truth ....why argue about things that aren't found in that truth?
The opposite of true... is false. That simple.

Scuba Pete · Dec 20, 2005

So we should forget all about Jesus until he tells us to remember him? I don't think so. Consider this passage:

Matthew 26:6 While Jesus was in Bethany in the home of a man known as Simon the Leper, 7 a woman came to him with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, which she poured on his head as he was reclining at the table.
8 When the disciples saw this, they were indignant. "Why this waste?" they asked. 9 "This perfume could have been sold at a high price and the money given to the poor."
10 Aware of this, Jesus said to them, "Why are you bothering this woman? She has done a beautiful thing to me. 11 The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have me. 12 When she poured this perfume on my body, she did it to prepare me for burial. 13 I tell you the truth, wherever this gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her." NIV

The disciples have ALWAYS been offended by true worship. It is filled with emotions and feelings and we have been taught that these are "bad". If it glorifies Christ, it is beautiful!

Katzpur · Dec 20, 2005

may said:
...true christians do not make a fuss about others celebrating chrismas its just that they dont take part in it themselves so its a matter of choice

So "true" Christians can't have a difference of opinion on this matter? And anyone who chooses to celebrate Christmas is really just a "false" Christian? What a "Christian" way of looking at it.

jeffrey · Dec 20, 2005

ND, I agree. Hope I can word this right. Some people try to find to much meaning in the Bible and loose what it is trying to teach us. Jesus came to earth, for 1, to set the law straight. Man complicates things. Jesus simplified things. Now man is trying to complicate his word.... again. As ND says, love God, love everyone else. That's what Christ taught. Is not Christmas love for others?

Christmas

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator Emeritus

Administrator Emeritus

Active Member

Le plongeur avec attitude...

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

User of Aspercreme

Veteran Member

Le plongeur avec attitude...

Well-Known Member

Le plongeur avec attitude...

Holding All and None

Well-Known Member

New Member

Le plongeur avec attitude...

Not your average Mormon

â Ãig Dogâ

â Ãig Dogâ