|
Should Christians Celebrate Christmas? PART 5 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Written by David Gaddy
|
|
Friday, 18 December 2009 16:04 |
Part 5: A Celebration of Christ or Commercialism?
A large part of what keeps Christmas alive year after year is, let's face it, the gift giving. For many non-Christians, Christmas is still practiced mainly because of this. This aspect creates a chain of events. As long as people are buying presents, stores will cater to them. The more stores promote the Holidays, the more people want to buy stuff. The more people buy, the more they want to receive. With all of this greed in the air, does the commercialism of the Season totally nullify the good parts of Christmas? It shouldn't. Sure, the spirit of greed can taint the spirit of Christmas, but the truth is, people are sinners. That's why we needed a savior to begin with. Hence, amid all of the greed is the true nature of the gift-giving practice… love. A light appears brightest when surrounded by darkness.
"Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." - Matthew 5:14-16
The abundance of sin means abundant opportunities to teach. How did the gift-giving practice get started anyway? It was patterned after the Magi (wise men) who brought gifts to Jesus after his birth. Look to that example. Was greed a part of that process? No. It was done through love, honor, and respect. That pattern should remain for us. There are many lessons to be learned at Christmas time from all of the commercialism. What is given is not as important as the spirit in which it was given and the spirit in which it was received. As Christians we should personify this in our actions and teach it openly to those who need to learn. Look at what Paul taught the Ephesians as he left them for the last time:
"I have coveted no man's silver, or gold, or apparel. Yea, ye yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were with me. I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive." - Acts 20:33-35
Paul did not teach, "You can't stop greed, so stop giving." Which is the message conveyed when we suggest we stop practicing Christmas because of commercialism. Instead we should use the opportunity to exercise the teachings of Paul and Jesus. If the Christians give up on Christmas, then the commercialism and greed wins because the greedy will not stop simply because you did. God blesses us with opportunities to teach his will and Christmas provides us with many opportunities to do so.
Think about this. Christmas time is a rare time of the year where people are less intimidated by the story of Christ. They are caught up in the emotions of the season which opens the door to their hearts. Through the season they can be taught about who Jesus really was and why His birth was so significant, and more importantly, what His death, burial, and resurrection accomplished. We have more opportunities to teach love, joy, peace, and the true spirit of giving. If a lost sinner comes to me and wants to know if I would like to be part of a Christmas gift-exchange and I respond with, "Sorry, I don't do Christmas", what message am I sending to him? A confusing one. For once, he was open to the idea of Jesus through this practice and I just shot it down. He does not understand my complex logic behind the decision, he is only wondering why a Christian would not want to be part of the joys of Christmas, a Christian holiday. An opportunity to teach is lost. This is also very difficult for our children in school who have an even harder time explaining to their friends and teachers why they do not "do Christmas". And although we may think that by not "doing Christmas" we have removed an element of greed from our family's lives, we may have introduced elements of envy and covetousness to them without realizing it because they feel left out.
Removing greed from our holiday experience should not be quite so difficult. We can impose spending limits on each other. We can resolve to only give each other home-made gifts. These types of limitations force us to think harder about the gifts (more blessed to give), therefore making them more meaningful, and it keeps the greed and commercial aspects to a minimum. Yet we can still enjoy the meaning of the holiday, celebrate our love for God and His gift of His son, and be a strong witness to teach others. The world is trying it's best to take Christ out of Christmas through political correctness and social awareness. The socialists and the atheists are doing their best to shoot Christianity down from all sides. As Christians, are we going to help them or hinder them?
My hope is to celebrate Christ every day of my life, not just on Christmas. But if the world is actually willing to acknowledge Him on December 25th, I will celebrate then as well, making use of any opportunities it affords by promoting the love of Jesus Christ and salvation through Him.
May the love of Christ be with you and in you all… and Merry Christmas.
|
|
|
Should Christians Celebrate Christmas? PART 4 |
|
|
|
|
Written by David Gaddy
|
|
Thursday, 17 December 2009 16:11 |
Part 4: Jesus never instituted Christmas Celebration
It is true. Jesus never specifically asked us to remember His birth. However, Matthew and Luke both imply through their writings that the event of Jesus' birth was majestic and worthy of some celebration. But first let's look at some issues, then at the examples of celebrating Christ's birth to see if scripture can, in fact, support it.
The Bible teaches us not to esteem one day above another. Does it? I've heard that all my life, but that actual phrase is not in the Bible. The closest scripture to this is found in Romans:
"One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." - Romans 14:5
This verse is not telling us "not to esteem one day over another". It tells us we have liberty to esteem one day over another or not to. If we look at the context of this verse, it is specifically referring to Jewish Christians who still felt obligated to worship on the holy days and feast days of the Jewish religion. Paul was telling them not to condemn those who did this. His point was also to let the Christians choose whether to celebrate the days or not, just as long as everything was done to honor God. If we continue into verse 6 we see this:
"He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it." - Romans 14:6a
Although the passage is referring to Jewish holy days, the truth of the statement in verse 6 still applies. Regarding the day as a day of celebration is up to the participants, as long as it is done unto the Lord. The bottom line is: what is in your heart when you do the things you do? If you love God with all of your heart, you will be serving Him in one way or another: through song or shouts of praise or lifting your hands or falling to your knees. And this will happen with every opportunity you can find.
Why make a big deal over Jesus' birth when the more important thing is His death? Does celebrating Christmas put the focus on the wrong event in Jesus' life? Let's stop and think about this. We come together every week to remember His death and celebrate it. Christmas only comes once per year. How is this then unbalanced, if the ratio of days to celebrate His death in contrast to His birth are 52:1?
"For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come." - 1 Corinthians 11:26
Every time we partake of His communion, we commemorate His death. How often does this happen in the course of a year? I think we can all agree that His death was more important than His birth, but let's also not diminish the importance that His birth has. God sent His only son to this earth because He loved us. We received the gift of His life when He was born, miraculously from a virgin. This was a one time event, it never happened before and it would never happen again. That is amazing and worthy of some celebration:
"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger. And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men." - Luke 2:10-14
Tidings of great joy… to all people. That includes us. Then look at how the angels responded to the news of Jesus' birth. A whole host of them gathered to celebrate God's grace being given to mankind. There is cause for celebration. We have let this talk of paganism and the question of the date rob us of our joy and thanksgiving for this event. So much so in fact, that many Christians are uncomfortable even reading the scriptures about Jesus' birth or singing songs about Jesus' birth because of it. Songs like Away in a Manger, O Come All Ye Faithful, What Child is This, and Joy to the World have all been labeled as Christmas Carols and are never sang by many Christians even though they bring glory and honor to our savior by remembering his wonderful and miraculous birth (although Joy to the World is really about His second coming). These songs allow us to do exactly the same thing the angels were doing that day. Let's see how others reacted.
"When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was. When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy. 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." - Matthew 2:9-11
These wise men (or magi) from Persia were more than likely descendants of the servants of Cyrus who had appointed Daniel over the astronomers there. Hence, they were privy to this prophecy and were led here. When they realized they were about to finally see the son of God, they "rejoiced with exceeding great joy". I think it is safe to say, they felt this was worthy of some celebration. Eight days after Jesus' birth, he was taken to the temple to be circumcised and two people there had recognized the miracle and came to join in this celebration. First was a man named Simeon who, when he saw Jesus reacted in this way:
"Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said, Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word:" - Luke 2:28-30
He was so overjoyed, he felt his life was complete and that he'd be content for God take him now. The other person was a prophetess named Anna who likewise gave thanks to God for the birth of this child and began to spread the word of his coming. Both of these elderly people's lives were pinnacled by this one moment in time to behold the very son of God given to mankind. I am sure they celebrated this occasion in their hearts until they died, because they understood the loving grace God gave to us. His love abounds to us and He wants our love in return. That love leads to praise and worship in every opportunity afforded us.
"Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment." - Matthew 22:37-38
Do we love Him so much that we will take any excuse we can to praise Him? I want to celebrate His birth, His life, His teachings, His love, His death, and His resurrection! He is King of Kings, Lord of Lords, the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, and one day we will sit before His thrown to celebrate ALL of Him, every minute of His life, and every minute He has spent in our lives.
To be concluded in Part 5: A Celebration of Christ or Commercialism? |
|
Should Christians Celebrate Christmas? PART 3 |
|
|
|
|
Written by David Gaddy
|
|
Wednesday, 16 December 2009 12:54 |
Part 3: Jesus wasn't even born on Christmas day
Was Jesus born on December 25th? If not, then why was December 25th chosen as the day to celebrate Christ's birth? Was it adopted from the Roman festival of Saturnalia? Let's just start by saying, the Biblical text does not give us much to go on in determining the date of Jesus' birth. There are a couple of clues to the time of the year. One is the mention of shepherds in the fields with their sheep (Luke 2:8). Some use this as a reason why it could not have been December. They say that December is too late in the season for shepherds to have been in the fields. I'm not too sure why this is overly convincing. Sure, in the winter there is less open field grazing but the temperature in Israel is not too prohibitive in December. I've been in Israel in December and was quite comfortable in a light jacket at night. I also saw and took photos of sheep in the open field. Some might think the text indicates that it was lambing season, which was in the spring, but it would be just as realistic to suppose the shepherds would have been corralling sheep in December. At any rate, many believe this issue of the sheep is not a good indicator to determine the time of year.
Let's look at the historical records for Jesus' birth date. There are hundreds of writings of early Christians, dating all the way back to the New Testament time. None of them mention a date of Jesus' birth until Clement of Alexandria in 200 AD. According to Clement various groups had associated differing dates to the birth, oddly December 25th isn't in his list. He mentioned May 20th and April 20th. Clearly, it was not certain by this time yet many were taking interest in finding a date. By the year 312 AD, we can find two primary dates were being used as Jesus' birthday. This still predates the actual establishment of the Catholic religion by about 100 years. The two dates were December 25th in the Western part of the Roman Empire and January 6th in the Eastern part. Most have now dropped the January 6th date (with the exception of the Armenian Christians). But the 12 days between those dates are often referred to as the "12 Days of Christmas". Hence that long and annoying Christmas Carol. The earliest mention we can currently find of December 25th being the birth date of Jesus comes from a Roman Almanac dated about 350 AD. We also find recorded at about 400 AD the record of the Donatists celebrating December 25th as Christ's birth, but refusing to celebrate January 6th because they considered it an "innovation of man". This sort of predates the practice, since history shows the Donatists to be a strict traditionalist sect dating back to to 312 AD. As staunch traditionalists, it is unlikely they would have changed their practices since then.
But the question remains, why December 25th? Who chose it and why? The answer is, no one knows. Let me repeat that: The facts are inconclusive and no one knows who first chose December 25th and why. However there are a couple of theories. One of which is the most popular and the one I mentioned in my first article on this subject. It is also the one Alexander Hislop leaned on so heavily in his famous book on the subject, "The Two Babylons". This theory is that the date was borrowed from pagan traditions and festivals, most specifically the Roman Saturnalia festival. By 275 AD, the birth of Sol Invictus (the unconquered sun) was celebrated on December 25th by decree of emperor Aurelian. The theory goes that early Christianity chose the date in order to supplant the pagan festival with Christian practices in an attempt to help spread Christianity throughout the pagan world.
Although this is the most used theory, it is not without it's problems. The fact is, once again we have hundreds of Christian writings available to us from this time frame and none of them mention this type of decision. Some mention the December 25th date, but none of them critique it as being established by the church to promote Christianity over paganism. Debates during this time were rampant on all kinds of topics. Surely some Christian groups would have opposed this move and condemned it in writing, but the record is completely absent of any such talk. Some writers in fact, implied the similarities between Jesus' birth date and pagan festivals as providential proof that God was placing His son over pagan religions. It wasn't until the 12th century, that it was even suggested in writing that the date was purposefully chosen to replace paganism. This was some margin notes in a manuscript by Dionysus. This theory in general also has date issues. It seems December 25th was in use before the Catholics started Christianizing many pagan practices. Who is to say that emperor Aurelian did not chose December 25th as Sol Invictus because Christians claimed that date for Jesus' birth? It is just as plausible since during that time Christianity was still illegal and Rome was doing their best to eradicate it.
There is another theory not often looked at. But the theory is basically this: God put Jesus on this earth and removed him from this earth on the exact same day of the year. Talk of this is recorded as early as 200 AD when Tertullian calculated the date of Jesus' death (the 14th of the Jewish month of Nisan) during the year of His death to be on March 25th of the Roman Calendar. So if God placed Jesus on the earth on March 25th as well, then that would be the date of his conception in Mary, which just happens to be exactly nine months before December 25th. Augustine confirmed this in his writings as well around 400 AD. In the Jewish faith, the Babylonian Talmud mentions the month of Nisan as an important month for God. Great things happen in it say the Rabbis. They feel the Earth was created in Nisan, the passover happened in Nisan, and if the Rabbis are right about God's pattern, then it is plausible that Jesus would enter the womb during Nisan. After all we know for a fact that he died and was resurrected during Nisan. We also know God used the date before, not only at the Passover in Egypt, but also the date when Noah stepped off of the ark is given to us in scripture and translates to the 17th of Nisan (the pre-anniversary of Jesus' resurrection).
So in the end, our questions still remain. Was Jesus born on December 25th? If not, why was it chosen? We may never know for a fact. We should just not be too harsh in our condemnation of December 25th without any facts. And just maybe the date has more to do with God's patterns and the Jewish passover than it does any pagan festival. Ultimately, it is unimportant to our soul salvation if we know Jesus' birthday or not, or if we celebrate it on December 25th or not. Yet, it is infinitely important to know that He was born and became God with us, so that through Him, the lost might be saved.
To be continued in Part 4: Jesus Never Instituted Christmas Celebration |
|
Should Christians Celebrate Christmas? PART 2 |
|
|
|
|
Written by David Gaddy
|
|
Tuesday, 15 December 2009 13:25 |
Part 2: Jeremiah and the Christmas Trees
As we saw in our first article, most of the supposed origins of Christmas traditions (whether we know it or not) come from Alexander Hislop's book, "The Two Babylons" (1853) which used very large leaps of logic to link traditional practices to pagan roots based solely on perceived similarities in practices. There is in fact, very little concrete historical evidence that some of these specific pagan practices even existing. If these practices did exist, Hislop failed to provide the exact ties binding them to the modern Christmas traditions. Instead he speculated that they must've come from Babylon simply because of noted similarities. The Christmas tree was one direct target. In Hislop's book, he attempted to tie any pagan practice involving trees to the Christmas tree specifically. This is simply not good history. His references to the palm trees used by Roman pagans does not substantiate a relationship to Christmas trees. There is a lot of talk in his book concerning the word "yule" in relationship with the Christmas tree because of the old traditions of burning a "yule-log" and replacing it in the morning with the Christmas tree. The word "yule", in norse means "wheel", however Hislop claimed it came from an older Chaldean word, "eol" which is Chaldee for infant or child. There is no historic evidence to link "eol" to "yule" at all, but Hislop assumed they were synonymous, therefore the burning of the yule-log was a symbol of child sacrifice by fire. This also allows him to tie in the supposed worship of Tammuz, the child God who dies and is resurrected every year (hence, the burned log becomes a trimmed tree). Even if yule did mean child or infant, it still makes sense if the focus was on Jesus' birth instead of child sacrifice. Other uses of the word like "yuletide joy", do not imply child sacrifice. The yule seems be honored in this phrase. The facts are, the origin of these traditions remains a mystery.
Since the time of Hislop, these claims have been passed around so much, they have started to be accepted as fact. So much so, that now many of us may know these stories and do not even know who Alexander Hislop was. People have taken these theories as fact and have used scriptures to try and bolster the claims. To drive the point home, Jeremiah 10 is often quoted as proof that Babylon was using the Christmas tree and that God condemned the practice.
First let's look at the passage in question:
"Hear ye the word which the LORD speaketh unto you, O house of Israel: Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. 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. 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."
-Jeremiah 10:1-5
Sounds like a Christmas tree right? And God is clearly condemning the practice mentioned here through his prophet Jeremiah. There are several problems with this interpretation. First, it is out of context. Jeremiah was God's prophet living in Jerusalem during the occupation of their land by the Babylonians. His goal was to convince the Jews that their oppression by the Babylonians was by God's spoken design and to help them refrain from the practices of the Babylonian religion. Now regardless of what Alexander Hislop said in "The Two Babylons", there is no historical evidence that the Christmas Tree originated in Babylon. The custom of erecting a Christmas tree can be traced to 16th century Northern Germany, though neither an inventor nor a single town can be identified as the sole origin for the tradition. The custom appears to have come from Christians who first decorated trees to represent the Tree of Life in combination with another tradition of decorating corner shelves with ornaments and a star on top in honor of the Star of Bethlehem. This is some 2000 years after the days of Jeremiah. So, if the Christmas tree originated in the 16th century, then what is Jeremiah condemning?
Let's look at the text closer and pull in some surrounding verses. Some of the confusion is in the wording. If we look at the original language for help we can see it more clearly. For example in verse 3 the term "workman" is not a lumber-jack, he is an artisan or a wood-carver. The word "axe" is used here in reference to a carving tool. So verse 3 tells us that a tree from a forest is carved into a work of art. In verse 4, they deck it with silver and gold. This is not a reference to tinsel. It is talking about pliable metal being molded around the carving. The hammers and nails are not fastening the tree to a stand so the tree doesn't move, they are fastening the gold and silver onto the carving so the gold and silver doesn't move. But verse 5 is the most telling in this passage. The result stands upright like a man would but has no power to speak. It has to be carried because it can not walk and it cannot do good or evil. Why? Because it is simply a carving of wood. This entire passage is talking about the construction of idols to be worshipped, not tree decorating. Verse 5 implies that the final result has the image of a living entity, not simply a tree with ornaments on it. If we continue reading, the rest of the passage confirms this. Verse 9:
"Silver spread into plates is brought from Tarshish, and gold from Uphaz, the work of the workman, and of the hands of the founder: blue and purple is their clothing: they are all the work of cunning men."
So the silver for this work is in plates (to be pounded onto the idol with a hammer). The gold is there by the hands of an artisan. The result is the work of cunning men (talented artists). And verse 11 drives the point further by tying this work to false gods:
"Thus shall ye say unto them, The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth, even they shall perish from the earth, and from under these heavens."
Then verse 14-15 tell us in no uncertain terms that Jeremiah is talking about idols (graven images):
"Every man is brutish in his knowledge: every founder is confounded by the graven image: for his molten image is falsehood, and there is no breath in them. They are vanity, and the work of errors: in the time of their visitation they shall perish."
In short, Jeremiah 10, like many other passages in the Bible is simply condemning idol worship and has absolutely no reference at all to Christmas trees. We have simply projected that image upon the text because the wording of the text sounded familiar to us, even though Jeremiah had never seen a Christmas tree in his life. In fact, no one did until 2000 years or so later. Hislop never even used this passage to make his point, and you'd think he would have if it were condemning Christmas trees. In the 1966 book, "Babylon Mystery Religion" by Ralph Woodrow, Woodrow mentions it to make his point against Christmas trees, but then he admits it is simply a reference to idol worship. He would later expound of the improper use of this passage in his later book, "The Babylon Connection?".
To be continued... Part 3: Jesus wasn't even born on Christmas Day. |
|
Should Christians Celebrate Christmas? PART 1 |
|
|
|
|
Written by David Gaddy
|
|
Monday, 14 December 2009 12:59 |
Being that the Christmas Holiday is upon us again, I thought I'd include a little discussion about the celebration of Christmas. Each year many Christians ask the question about whether it is appropriate to celebrate the Christmas holiday given some of the pagan roots of the traditions that surround it. This a valid concern that I would like to look at in this study and address some of these concerns. Here are a few of the most common points made:
1) Many Christmas traditions are rooted in pagan practices and therefore they are sinful acts.
2) Many Christmas traditions including the word "Christmas" itself are products of the Roman Catholic Church and protestants should not adhere to them.
3) Jeremiah 10 specifically condemns the use of a Christmas tree.
4) Jesus wasn't even born on Christmas day
5) If Jesus wanted his birthday celebrated, he would've instituted it.
6) Christmas = Commercialism = Greed = Sin
Whew! Lots of reasons for not doing Christmas. However let's look at these closely because there are issues of bad information, misinterpretation, and the merits of the practices to consider. Over the next few days, we'll cover the above list. For today, let's start with the big one(s):
Part 1: The Pagan and Catholic Roots of Christmas Traditions
First let's look at the origins of the holiday and the claims of paganism. The first thing I'd like to be clear on is that these statements about pagan roots are only partly true. Many of our Christmas traditions could have been adopted from pagan practices, probably by the early church as well as Catholicism in an effort to combat pagan practices by substituting them for Christian activities. However, many have blown the origin stories out of proportion based on theories and myth instead of historical facts. The truth is, when Christianity began to spread, it landed on top of many existing cultures, specifically for our study, Roman and Greek. These were pagan cultures with many traditions, festivals, and celebrations. Many of these practices were adopted to reflect Christian worship instead. Thus supplanting pagan worship with Godly worship. If this is true, the paganism was purposeful replaced to help remove it from the traditions of the people. One surprising specific result of this is the very use of the word "church", which came from the druid practice of worshipping in a circle (church literally means circle). The Greek New Testament used the word, ekklesia which was translated as "church" during the middle ages, after the word had been adopted from the druids. Many protestant translators like William Tyndale preferred to translate this word as "congregation" but King James made a decree to his translators to translate the word into "church" so as to maintain peace with the Roman Catholic Church.
When the reformation occurred, protestants initially rejected the practice of holidays because of the Catholic endorsement of these holidays. But after moving to the New World and things began to grow here, eventually Christmas was reintroduced and practiced even by protestants.
In 1858, a protestant Christian by the name of Alexander Hislop wrote a book called "The Two Babylons". This book made the claim that all Catholic practices were derived from the ancient religions of Babylon and therefore made their way into Christmas and other holidays. This started a firestorm against Christmas among protestant Christians and to this day most of the claims of specific traditions and their origins come from the claims in this book. However, Hislop's information cannot be confirmed against any real historical records. Many believe his claims about the Babylonian religion to be mostly speculation. In 1966, a Christian named Ralph Woodrow wrote a book on the same subject largely based on "The Two Babylons", called "Babylon Mystery Religion". This book rekindled the war against Christmas among Christians, but after Woodrow saw how flawed history in "The Two Babylons" was, he recanted his stance on Christmas and wrote a follow-up book called "The Babylon Connection?" which argued against his previous writing. The point was not to say Christmas traditions do not have pagan roots. The point is that we can speculate on it, but the definite origins of these traditions are very much a mystery and not definitely tied to Babylon, the Goddess Semiramis, or her God Son Tammuz (which may or may not have even been worshipped in Babylon). Hislop's study often made leaps in logic that it should not have. Using his type of logic, you could argue that because the traditional snowman is shaped like an idol from pagan history then it must have pagan origins. Two unrelated items should not be given a relationship simply based on similarity. This however is exactly what the Hislop book did. There is however little doubt that these practices originated somewhere outside of Christianity. The question really is: Does this make the practice evil or sinful?
Idol worship is sinful and most of these pagan practices were derived from some sort of idol worship. What makes idol worshipping sinful? God tells us right there in the Ten Commandments, because He is a jealous God and He only wants us to serve him. Does practicing traditional Christmas activities result in you actually worshipping another god? What if you are praising the true God while doing it? What is the intent in your heart? By and large, no one is practicing paganism today while participating in these traditions and no one is worshipping false gods in their heart by doing so. So is practicing something with pagan origins wrong? If so, then we have a larger problem than Christmas. Almost every traditional practice you can think of has some sort of pagan origin, superstitious origin, or pagan similarity. Here is just a small list:
1) The word, "church" itself has pagan roots.
2) The word, "bible" itself has Catholic origins
3) The Gregorian Calendar we use today was commissioned by a Catholic Pope (Gregory) and retained the names of days and months which honor pagan gods. Sunday = Sun Day (Helios), Monday = Moon Day (Ishtar), Tuesday = Tiu's Day (Mars, Aries,Tiu), Wednesday = Woden's Day (Mercury, Hermes), Thursday = Thor's Day (Thor, Jupiter, Zeus), Friday = Frig's Day (Venus, Aphrodite), Saturday = Saturn's Day (Saturn, Chronos). The months also each come from a pagan god's name.
4) The seemingly benign holiday of Thanksgiving could just as easily be tied to pagan celebrations of the harvest season, if the same leaps of logic in Hislop's book are used.
5) Wedding traditions: white dresses, veils, trains, wedding rings, wedding cake, throwing the bouquet and garter, the intertwined glasses, unity candles, candles in general, brides not seeing the grooms before the ceremony, throwing of rice, throwing of flower pedals. This is one of the most pagan filled traditions we practice yet strangely no one seems to be concerned about it like they are for Christmas.
6) Dressing newborn boys in blue, girls in pink
7) It can even be argued that modern day sporting events are patterned after gladiatorial events which were also closely tied to pagan practices by making sport of sacrifices.
8) Any number of sayings we throw around like, "Knock on wood", "jinx", "bless you" (when someone sneezes)
9) Any number of gestures and habits like: covering you mouth as you yawn (although now seen as a courtesy, it was originally thought to hold your spirit in), tossing salt over the shoulder, crossing fingers as a hopeful gesture
This list goes on and on. Almost everything we do traditionally, either is or through unsubstantiated leaps of logic could be tied to a pagan origin. The point is, the origin of a tradition is not as important as the heart of the practitioner, especially when the tradition has been restructured purposefully to bring glory to God. In the case of Christmas, it is one of the few times of the year where the world actually (at least in some ways) acknowledges Jesus Christ openly. The non-believers in most cases do not know the origins of these traditions, they just see it as a Christian holiday. What message do Christians send to them, if we stand alongside the atheists and the socialists in their attempts to remove Christmas from the calendar? Can we not instead use Christmas as a tool and an open door to promote Jesus Christ to the lost?
To be continued in Part 2 - Jeremiah and the Christmas Tree |
|
|
