Is it wrong for Christians to observe Christmas?

First lets look at this statement from you:

"The way that you apply this verse is "situation ethics." What is right for me, may not be for you." Sorry, that is the wrong application.

I am sorry that you and many of my other fundamentalist brethren have fallen into the error of "what is wrong for me, is always wrong for you too". I agree that where there are absolutes in scripture this is true. But many times our standards are based on our own personal application of scriptures.

Lets take for example our movie theater illustration:

Lets look at a passage you quoted:

James 4:4(NIV)
"You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God."

Here was your application of this passage:
"How close are you willing to live to God, or how close are you going to get to the world? "Whosoever is a friend of the world is the enemy of God?" What exactly did God mean by that? I can tell you one thing. He didn't mean go into movie theatres."


Here is my application of that passage:
Lets look at friendship here, what is friendship? When you are a friend with someone you like the things they like, you approve of the things they approve of. The other part of this verse is "world" - what is meant by this? It is the ungodly system which opposes God.

Now when I go to the grocery store the world does that. Does that make me a friend of the world because I approve of the world's practice of to grocery stores? No.

Does that mean I approve of everything that is sold in the groceries stores - like some of the smutty magazines? No. If I approved of those I would be "a friend of the world".

What about book stores? I love to read history and computer programming books. When I go to B Dalton or some other book store and buy a book I am approving the world's practice of going to a book store. Does that mean I am a friend of the world? No.

Do I approve of all the books B Dalton sells? No. If I approved the smutty books they sell I would be "a friend of the world".

So being a friend of the world is approving of those things the world does that are inherently evil and wrong things to do.

So when I go to a movie theater am I approving the world's practice of going to a show? Yes, but does that make me a friend of the world - no.

Does that mean I approve of the wrong movies that are show there? No, if I did I would be a "friend of the world".

Lets now look at this quote of yours:
"You go to the movie theatre and that is your Christian testimony. The world thinks that born again believers go to the movies, so they do to. You encourage it. But you encourage their pornography, their filth, and the dirtiest movies they can find to watch, because you have put your had of approval on the movie theatre. They have seen you do it. You have condoned it by your prosence, when you ought to have condemned it by your absence."

So I and other Christians who go to shows that are not pornagraphic in nature are encouraging people to go to ones that are?

So when you go to the grocery store you are encouraging people to buy the smutty magazines then ah?

How about when you go to the book store and buy a history book you are encouraging other people to come there and buy a porngraphic book?

The answer to all of the above is you are not. Once again, the seperation you adovcate is not one taught in scripture. Biblical seperation is seperation from things and practices that in and of themselves are sinful - period.

The last thing I want to deal with that you said was calling my thinking "Situation ethics".

On this I plead guilty as charged. But so are you. There is nothing wrong with situational ethical practice, we all practice it each day. Certainly not all things are situational in nature, some are absolute while others are not.

For instance, going back to my TV example of a previous post. Is it wrong for me to watch TV if I am clear in my conscience before God that what I am watching is ok, then it is fine for that moment. But in another "situation", if I have a brother over my house who does not have a television it would be wrong for me to turn it on when he is around. So you see, sometimes the situation does determine if something is right or wrong to do.

One more example of "situational ethics". If a man comes up to my home trying to sell magazines and I shoot him for bothering me that would be wrong. But if he comes up to my home and trying to sell magazines and pulls a gone on me and I shoot him then it is not wrong to shoot.

In one "situation", my act of shooting him is murder, in the other "situation" my act of shooting him is self-defense.

Yes we are to be different than the world - on that we agree. But where we are to be different - that is where we disagree. I believe we are to be different by not engaging in those practices of the world that are inherently evil and sinful in and of themselves.

You believe we are to be different from the world by not engaging in practices that while they may not be sinful in and of themselves, they are abused by the world so therefore they are wrong even if not sinful.

Basically your thinking is,if it can be abused, then it is wrong. If it is made by a company that produces wrong things, even if the item itself is not wrong, then it becomes wrong by nature of guilt by association.

The two problems with your thinking are one - it is not Biblical, and two you do not and really cannot apply your thinking consistantly.

IFBReformer

 

DHK,

Your statement:

In 1611, people understood what the KJV translators meant by "appearance". You can tell what they meant by "appearance" from how they translated that same Greek word 'eidos' in these passages along with the one you stated:

Luke 3:22(KJV)
"And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape[eidos] like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased."

Luke 9:29(KJV)
"And as he prayed, the fashion[eidos] of his countenance was altered, and his raiment was white and glistering."

John 5:37
"And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape[eidos]."

2 Corinthians 5:7(KJV)
(For we walk by faith, not by sight[eidos]

1 Thessalonians:5:22(KJV)
"Abstain from all appearance[eidos] of evil."

So now do you understand that 'appearance' here is not how we use it in our modern english? Much bad theology has been made over the years from a misunderstanding of the old English. The NIV and NASB translate in our modern english correctly when they render it as:

1 Thessalonians 5:22(NASB)
"abstain from every form[eidos] of evil."

1 Thessalonians 5:22(NIV)
"Avoid every kind[eidos] of evil."

So yes I should "avoid every kind of evil". We agree on that completely. What is a kind of evil? It is me going to a particular movie that is filled with filth. It is not going to the Movie theater itself.

I would disgree with you that most of what is at the movie theater is filth. There are many movies that do have redeemable value, and this is where Christians must use discernment.

Going to a show does not give the appearance of evil to unbelievers. Going to a bad show does, but not simply entering the movie theater. Sure you could find me some exception to that some place. But most of the time the only people it gives the appearance of evil to is Christians like yourself who have your own preconceived notions.

Your Statement:

None of these things "determine how worldly you are".

It is the tapes that we play in our "VCRs" that determine if we are worldly or not - not simply having a VCR.

It is the television shows that we watch on our TV that determine if we are worldly or not - not simply having a TV.

It is the movies we watch that determine if we are worldy - not the fact that we watch movies.

It is the immoral or immodest clothes we where that determine if we are worldy, not the fact that the world may like to where the same polo shirt I have on.

It is the immoral and evil places that we go that determine if we are worldly, not the fact that I go to a Baseball game and so does the world.

It is the evil words and evil things we say that make us worldly, not because we use the same english as the world around us.

It is not listening to music that "mimics the world or is of the world" that makes us worldly -for all forms of music, whether folk, Classical or Contemporary music all have their origin in the world. It is listening to music that is has evil and sensual words and motions.

Yes I agree we have a choice, will we listen to and watch the evil movies and music of the world, or will we listen to and watch those things that are not evil.

Your Statement:

By my action of going to a non-pornagraphic movie I have encouraged someone to go see one?Your logic escapes me.
That would be like me saying by your going on the internet you encourage everyone to look at pornography on the internet since there is so much out there.

And no if I drink one beer I would not be giving an alchohalic an excuse to drink. Thats like saying if I take one bite of pizza I am encouraging a glutton to gorge themselves.

In fact the Scriptures compare the sin of drunkness to the sin of gluttony:

Proverbs 23:20-21(NIV)
"20 Do not join those who drink too much wine
or gorge themselves on meat,
21 for drunkards and gluttons become poor,
and drowsiness clothes them in rags."

The Scriptures only forbid drunkeness. Not drinking wine itself. I know this is going to rabit trail into this whole other discussion about wine. Hopefully not - that is not my point here.


Your Statement:

I agree completely with this statement. We need to be different in more way than being against murder and abortion. We need to be different in how we respond to our bosses at work. We need to be different in not using the foul language our coworkers use.

We need to be different by not going to see bad movies, or listening to music with evil words, or buying books that are evil.

That is how we will show them that we are different. If we wear only black and white clothes that does more than show we are different, it shows we are distant. We are to keep Gods Word, not add to it so we can be more different.

I am reminded of few things Spurgeon spoke about the tendency among conservative Christians to add to the Word of God:

Your Statement:

These are all cases of valid cases of "situational ethics" no matter how your try and dance around them.

In one case, to shoot someone would be murder, in the other it would be self-defense.

In one case to watch TV would be fine, in the other it would not, even if the show was fine.

As far as your statement "it is always wrong to lie." - really? What about when Rahab lied to protect the spies in Jericho?

Lets zoom in on this statement of yours:
"So, taken to its logical conclusion, because my parents don't practice the things of the world (your definition), they must be friends of God, and therefore Christian. Right?"

I never said not practicing the evil things the world does makes you a friend of God! Works don't save us whether we are saved or unsaved. Boy was that a leap!

Thats great that your parents do live descent lives, but as you and I both know living a righteous life doesn't save you. If we are to be stricter than the unsaved then how about the buddahist monks -they are a lot more strict then we are, boy do we have a long way to go then.

Fortunately the Bible never tells us to make up rules so we can be more different, it just tells us not to do those things which are sin. It is such an easy concept to understand, but so hard to practice. And for some like you, it is not enough, you need to add a few more rules to the pot so you can feel more different.

Hey if that makes you feel closer to God, than by all means do it. If it causes you to judge your brother, then you better re-evaluate your attitude.

Your Statement:

Yes sir, lets not be like the world in the evil practices it does. Lets be like Christ by doing the righteous things he did.

Sadly, two many people trip over these simple commands. They either do the evil practices of the world, or they add rules to God Word.

Matthew 15:9(NIV)
"They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.'"

1 Corinthians 4:6(NIV)
Now, brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, "Do not go beyond what is written." Then you will not take pride in one man over against another.

IFBReformer

 

In 1611, people understood what the KJV translators meant by "appearance". You can tell what they meant by "appearance" from how they translated that same Greek word 'eidos' in these passages along with the one you stated:

Luke 3:22(KJV)
"And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape[eidos] like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased."

Luke 9:29(KJV)
"And as he prayed, the fashion[eidos] of his countenance was altered, and his raiment was white and glistering."

John 5:37
"And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape[eidos]."

2 Corinthians 5:7(KJV)
(For we walk by faith, not by sight[eidos]

1 Thessalonians:5:22(KJV)
"Abstain from all appearance[eidos] of evil."

So now do you understand that 'appearance' here is not how we use it in our modern english? Much bad theology has been made over the years from a misunderstanding of the old English. The NIV and NASB translate in our modern english correctly when they render it as:

1 Thessalonians 5:22(NASB)
"abstain from every form[eidos] of evil."

1 Thessalonians 5:22(NIV)
"Avoid every kind[eidos] of evil."

So yes I should "avoid every kind of evil". We agree on that completely. What is a kind of evil? It is me going to a particular movie that is filled with filth. It is not going to the Movie theater itself. </font>[/QUOTE]1 Thessalonians 5:22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.

(Albert Barnes)
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]1 Thessalonians 5:22(NIV)
"Avoid every kind of evil."

I seek to avoid every kind of evil, not things which are not evil that may to be appear evil to select few.

I think the author you quoted sums up your position nicely, however wrong it may be. Let me explain something to you. I don't think there is anything wrong with you drawing the line where you do on things, like not stepping foot in a Movie Theater even to see a good movie.

Thats fine, as Paul writes in Romans 14:5 - "Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind."

If you cannot walk into a theater in good conscience, or if you can't walk into a restrant that serves alchohal in good conscience, then don't do it. As Paul writes again in Romans 14:

Romans 14:23(NIV)
"But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin."

Where the problem comes is when you draw the line someplace the Bible has not and then make that the line everyone else around you is held to. That is when you "judge someone else's servant"(Rom 14:4).

Since you quoted an author who summarizes your position I will requote an author I believe summarizes my position on this:

"I find ten commandments, and it's as much as I can do to keep them; and I've no desire to make them into eleven or twelve."

And this statement:

"There is growing up in society a Pharisaic system which adds to the commands of God the precepts of men; to that system I will not yield for an hour. The preservation of my liberty may bring upon me the upbraidings of many good men, and the sneers of the self-righteous; but I shall endure both with serenity so long as I feel clear in my conscience before God."

Charles Spurgeon

This article can be found at http://www.spurgeon.org/misc/cigars.htm

IFBReformer

 

In the next couple of paragraphs after the one you quoted, Spurgeon says this:

He said "I shall see my fault and turn from it." And in fact he did. Eventually he gave up the habit.
He said, "I am told that my open avowal will lessen my influence." He came to that realization. He gave up the habit.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]DHK,

Actually thats completely false. This is a myth that had been was spread years later. Look at the article I gave you the link to.

They have the most information as far as sermons, notes, and news paper articles and other things about Spurgeon, more than anyone in the world.

Spurgeon never gave up smoking cigars because he did not feel that it was wrong. In fact he had contests with friends of his to prove he could not smoke them for long periods of time and after he beat the he would start back.

IFBReformer