Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
So 2000 years of Christian history and tradition are meaningless because you have a different opinion?Originally posted by latterrain77:
The "X" in the word "X-mas" quite obviously obliterates the word CHRIST in the word Christmas (regardless of the largely unknown and meaningless history concerning the "X" as reported on this thread).
You're missing the fact that it is not X-ing out Christ's name. You you say the pronounce the name of Jesus as "Yeshua"? If you don't, you're replacing the name of Jesus with something else -- something a "true believer" would not do according to your rationale.As such, any true believer would never use the "X" to stamp out Christ's name.
And by implication, we are not "true believers". That's quite a bit of slander and is unworthy of a Christian. More importantly, it is also a sin against God to falsely judge your brothers in Christ.Of course, BaptistBeliever & Joshua you are both free to "x-out" Christ's name as much as you wish and for whatever reason you fancy. I won't try to stop you or encourage you to do otherwise.
Only ignorant people assume that those who spell "Christmas" as "Xmas" have changed anything.As for me, I will stick to the word CHRIST in CHRISTmas and will boldly remind all other Christians to do the same.
Actually, it refers to Christ as "Xristos" (except using Greek letters). If you want to be "biblical," you better stop using English translations/transliterations. The Christian heritage of using English translations is much shorter than the heritage of using the "chi" symbol for Christ. As soon as you reject speaking of the gospel in English terms and relying on English translations, I will reconsider my use of the "chi".The Bible never once refers to Christ as "X." How then can "Christians use it out of knowledge and heritage" when the Bible never says it?
They can and we do -- without sin.They can't!
No biblical truth is being compromised here.Does "man's knowledge and heritage" trump the BIBLICAL truth?
Good for you! Now deal with the real issue.I say no.
Nope. It comes from that allegedly "largely unknown and meaningless history" of the Christian faith. (By the way, it is not "unknown" to Christians who have done any serious study of Christian history nor is it "meaningless" except to those who would willingly make themselves ignorant.)Such "knowledge and heritage" comes straight from the heart of man (Mark 7: 8, Col. 2: 8).
OBVIOUSLY common sense is not that common. For what it's worth, you *do* understand that "Christ" is a *title* (the Greek version of "Messiah"), not Jesus' last name, right?Furthermore, common sense OBVIOUSLY shows that the word CHRISTmas is FAR more GOD glorifying than the word Xmas.
I've never seen the word "Christ" covered with a huge "X". Furthermore, many unbelievers are ignorant of Christian history, so we shouldn't base our faith and practice on those who outside of the faith.Unbelievers rejoice when the name CHRIST is covered with a huge "X."
Actually it can provide a great opportunity to share your faith to an unbeliever when you discuss the term "Xmas". It's a perfect object lesson that doesn't sound "church-y".Why egg them on?
Nice verse... I agree with it, but I don't think it applies here.1 Peter 4: 14, "If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified."
Actually, you're talking about the *English* Bible. We're drawing on a heritage longer and broader than the English Bible translations.This verse - and all others in the Bible - do not say; in the name of "X." It says in the name of Christ.![]()
You better get rid of your crosses then since a lot of people who know nothing of Jesus use a cross as a fashion symbol...Originally posted by Pennsylvania Jim:
Here's something for those who say that they like to use the "X" because of what it originally meant, ignoring what it largely implies today.
At one time the swastika was a harmless symbol, before the National Socialists used it.
Knowing that it was originally a respectable symbol, do you display it today, say, in jewelry, wall hangings, decorations, etc.?
I didn't think so. I don't either, just like I don't use the "X" in Christmas.
Just wanted to note here that I am not rejecting the King James Bible (although I am not KJVO). The point I was trying to make is that he was upset I was using a Greek symbol to represent Christ (an ancient tradition) while he was using an English translation (where English words represent/replace/interpret the Greek New Testament) instead of copies of the original Greek manuscripts ( a much later tradition since English translations were non-existent during the first 1000 years A.D.) He is on much shakier ground than I am using his reasoning.Originally posted by CDGriffin:
I have heard Xmas is the world trying to take Christ out of Christmas ,and I have heard that Xmas is to mean something good as many of you say.
I have not been to seminary or seriously studied church history as many of you have. I know a little bit about both. I would not though question the King James Bible even if it is a later English translation. It is the Word of God.
Sure, I understand that. Not everyone has had the opportunity nor the calling. But if some have had the opportunity to study, shouldn't we at least give a listening ear and so if what they say is true?But back to the main subject. Not everyone has taken notes in seminary or studied back to A.D.30.
Yep. And that's the point of the thread. Almost everyone understands that too.So most are ignorant of the use of X in Greek ,and to most it would appear to be trying to X out Christ that is why I write it Christmas./QB]
I doubt it would fill a book or even a full chapter... but there are plenty of web sites on the internet where this information is available for anyone who knows how to use a search engine.Maybe one of you should write a book about the many wonderful uses of "X" in languages besides English.
Since I am a true believer and he indicated that true believers would never use Chi ("X) for Christ, then his statement is patently untrue.I do not think it slander to call some one wrong though if it is true
I regard falsehood as being a very serious issue -- especially when someone claims that another believer is not a "true believer". You better believe I am going to judge a comment that falsely condemns me!and Baptist Believer you used as much judgment as the other person in your post.
As someone who is in the publishing industry, I am aware of the distinction. But since the Internet is an interactive and much more immediate form of communication than the printed page, I consider our posts simply typed conversations.Baptistbeliever, slander is spoken words and libel is written.Not stated to imply I am not ignorant, I have a sister who is an English teacher and I have beside me an 1828 Websters dictionary.
Originally posted by Baptist Believer:
Good point. I don't think we need to get rid of them but I am aware of what you point out and so do not plaster it around frivolously.You better get rid of your crosses then since a lot of people who know nothing of Jesus use a cross as a fashion symbol...
Why should we abandon our faith symbols because of the ignorance of others? Instead of retreating, we should educate. Every time someone thinks that "Xmas" belittles or removes Christ, we should use that opportunity to explain the Christian heritage of the symbol and turn the conversation to Christ...
Great idea, thanks.
Amen to your point, but I think it does not solve anything. Those opposing your argument would say that TODAY (2002) using the "X" IS giving in to the world.Instead of giving in to the world, we should be taking our faith to the world. Or is that too hard?
So anyway, do you display the swastika?
[ December 20, 2002, 08:22 AM: Message edited by: Pennsylvania Jim ]
Agreed.Amen to your point, but I think it does not solve anything. Those opposing your argument would say that TODAY (2002) using the "X" IS giving in to the world.
The swastika hasn't been used as a Christian symbol for at least 1700 years and was so tarnished by Nazism that it gives the wrong impression.Originally posted by Pennsylvania Jim:
Those opposing your argument would say that TODAY (2002) using the "X" IS giving in to the world.
So anyway, do you display the swastika?
Originally posted by SheEagle9/11:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Amen to your point, but I think it does not solve anything. Those opp