How do you believe Jesus would feel about our celebration of his birth in the form of Christmas (both commercial and spiritual)?
-
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!
Would Jesus approve of Christmas?
- Thread starter righteousdude2
- Start date
Commercial against no question.
I really like that comment. It's a 10+ in my heart of hearts. Thanks!
1. As a man growing up and then ministering in the first century, NO. They celebrated the death of people, not their birth. The only people to celebrate births were pagans.
2. No, Xmas was a substitution of a pagan festival of the worship of a sun-god, saturnalia. When there was sufficient evidence that the days were getting longer (after the shortest day--Dec.21), and their god was not going to die, they threw a great party, got drunk, had orgies, etc. The world does much the same today. Christ would not approve.
3. It also has Catholic origins. Christ + mass. The mass of Christ. In that it is blasphemous. To re-sacrifice Christ over and over again is blasphemous. Christ would never approve of "the sacrifice of the mass."
4. It is (as the RCC is) syncretistic. That is it combines Christian elements with pagan elements. It combines all the commercialism and pagan roots of Santa Claus, the Xmas tree, the yule log, the lights, the mistletoe, etc. with the birth of Christ. None of that has anything to do with the birth of Christ, but it all evolved from paganism.
5. To a large degree it centers around self and not Christ. "How I am going to decorate my house;" "what gifts I have to buy;" what I have to do this season;" etc. It is a busy season of the year, not because of Christ, but because of self, and all of its commercialism. It takes away from the true worship of Christ and the simplicity of entering into his rest.
Need I go one. I could. Those are only starters.
Like, Santa is portrayed as a god. Just sing the song. "You better watch out, you better not pout...Why?
2. No, Xmas was a substitution of a pagan festival of the worship of a sun-god, saturnalia. When there was sufficient evidence that the days were getting longer (after the shortest day--Dec.21), and their god was not going to die, they threw a great party, got drunk, had orgies, etc. The world does much the same today. Christ would not approve.
3. It also has Catholic origins. Christ + mass. The mass of Christ. In that it is blasphemous. To re-sacrifice Christ over and over again is blasphemous. Christ would never approve of "the sacrifice of the mass."
4. It is (as the RCC is) syncretistic. That is it combines Christian elements with pagan elements. It combines all the commercialism and pagan roots of Santa Claus, the Xmas tree, the yule log, the lights, the mistletoe, etc. with the birth of Christ. None of that has anything to do with the birth of Christ, but it all evolved from paganism.
5. To a large degree it centers around self and not Christ. "How I am going to decorate my house;" "what gifts I have to buy;" what I have to do this season;" etc. It is a busy season of the year, not because of Christ, but because of self, and all of its commercialism. It takes away from the true worship of Christ and the simplicity of entering into his rest.
Need I go one. I could. Those are only starters.
Like, Santa is portrayed as a god. Just sing the song. "You better watch out, you better not pout...Why?
It depends on what you mean by Christmas. If you mean the selfishness and commercialism, then no. But if you mean God's children observing and meditating on the Incarnation, of God becoming man, then I'd say "yes." Some object on the grounds that we should always have this in mind, and rightly so. But there is a difference between that and actually devoting a specified time to contemplate, corporately, Jesus becoming man.
I have no problem with Christmas and view the objection that it is "Christ's mass" inconsistently misleading Some do not seem to find it necessary to attribute antiquated meanings to words/terms when there is a more contemporary definition available...unless it has to do with Christmas, Easter, or the word "reverend. The hypocrisy becomes evident when terms like "Calvinism," "Arminianism," and "Reformed" (to name a few) are discussed and granted contemporary meanings.
I have no problem with Christmas and view the objection that it is "Christ's mass" inconsistently misleading Some do not seem to find it necessary to attribute antiquated meanings to words/terms when there is a more contemporary definition available...unless it has to do with Christmas, Easter, or the word "reverend. The hypocrisy becomes evident when terms like "Calvinism," "Arminianism," and "Reformed" (to name a few) are discussed and granted contemporary meanings.
A birthday party whose date is likely several months off, and purposely chosen because it was a big day for pagans? Dunno.
Did God disapprove of setting Jerusalem up as the important capital city, later with the temple, because it had been an important city to the Jebusites?
Jesus approves of Christmas about as much as the Mass of Christ. It is all a lot of pagan idolatry with a Christian façade. Glorying in the flesh is never acceptable.
"Come out from among them saith The Lord; touch not the unclean thing" it still in effect.
Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Bro. James
"Come out from among them saith The Lord; touch not the unclean thing" it still in effect.
Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Bro. James
Sapper Woody
Well-Known Member
No doubt in my mind that Christ would support, and even join in on the way my family celebrates. Santa is downplayed, the Christmas story is emphasized, and we have a tradition where I present the table of the missing soldier.
Edited to add: if you don't think Jesus would join you in what you're doing, then you're wrong. "Jesus would hate me focusing on buying gifts" *While standing in line at WalMart on black Friday*
Edited to add: if you don't think Jesus would join you in what you're doing, then you're wrong. "Jesus would hate me focusing on buying gifts" *While standing in line at WalMart on black Friday*
Last edited by a moderator:
The real question is: By whose authority do we do what we call worship?
While Jesus did authorize us to remember His death, no where does He authorize remembrance of His birth. So, we wind up teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. It matters not how solemn and sincere we do it-- such is not authorized in scripture.
The end of the commission: "...teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and lo I am with you even unto the end of the age." We are at the end of the age--Jesus has kept His promises. He is faithful, even when we are not.
Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Bro. James
While Jesus did authorize us to remember His death, no where does He authorize remembrance of His birth. So, we wind up teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. It matters not how solemn and sincere we do it-- such is not authorized in scripture.
The end of the commission: "...teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and lo I am with you even unto the end of the age." We are at the end of the age--Jesus has kept His promises. He is faithful, even when we are not.
Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Bro. James
James,
I know that some (I know the CoC for certain) looks to Scripture to authorize specific aspects of worship (granted...they are selective). But many (myself included) believe that there is room under the authority of Scripture. Under that authority, the account in Scripture of Christ's birth is enough to devote time in its teaching. But many who observe Christmas go farther to meditate on the Incarnation, of God becoming man and taking on Himself the sins of the world (most Christmas sermons in the past several churches I've attended include the obvious - that is the Cross).
I suppose my question for those strongly opposed to others taking a specific time to consider the Incarnation would be "why"? Why does it offend you that I devote time to study specific passages or topics in Scripture? Why do you not teach the Incarnation...or if you do teach these doctrines, do you refrain from teaching them in December?
Not offended.
What is the address of the scripture which authorizes the Mass of Christ?
There is a remarkable scripture which speaks of the John the Baptist being beheaded as result of a birthday party of one called Herod.
Curious: the practice of Christmas was made illegal in England and New England in the 17th century.
"A little leaven leavens the whole lump."
Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Bro. James
What is the address of the scripture which authorizes the Mass of Christ?
There is a remarkable scripture which speaks of the John the Baptist being beheaded as result of a birthday party of one called Herod.
Curious: the practice of Christmas was made illegal in England and New England in the 17th century.
"A little leaven leavens the whole lump."
Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Bro. James
I'm glad, I certainly don't mean to offend.
I'm Baptist. Actually, I have lived in a strongly Baptist culture for most of my life. So please forgive my misunderstanding. I thought you were using a contemporary Christian definition of "Christmas" (as opposed to a secular view or an antiquated Catholic definition).
Words change in meaning, sometimes maintaining an older meaning as an alternate definition. For example, just look at one of Rippon's threads of the NIV (plugging your thread, Rippon...even though I disagree...:thumbsup
Another example - When most speak of "Reformed" (on the BB) they are not using the term to indicate 16th century Reformed theology, but instead are working off a more contemporary definition. Think of how difficult discussion would be if every word or phrase we used automatically diverted to their original meaning. Let's not do that here. I don't believe anyone here uses the definition of "Mass of Christ" for Christmas...that is not honest dialogue. But yes....holding a Mass for Christ is not a Baptist thing to do, you're right there.
John the Baptist was not beheaded as result of a birthday party. I'm not too fond of birthday parties, though...especially as I get older. But this issue is a matter of pride and elevating one's self (self worship). This does not apply when we recognize the Incarnation of Christ. Scripture tells us not to worship man, yet we do worship Christ. Of your arguments, this one is not valid.
Yes, 17th century England and New England held all kinds of views. I'm not English (old or new), I'm American (and from the South). My ancestors were Irish (I'm sure they believed some odd stuff way back when....heck, some probably do now).
Last edited by a moderator:
I would differ with you here.
John accused Herod of adultery. Herod had him thrown in jail. However, Herod enjoyed listening to him from time to time and had no intention of killing him. He also feared the reaction of the public.
On his birthday the daughter of wicked Herodias danced a seductive dance, such that Herod promised to give her up to half the kingdom. At her mother's behest she demanded John the Baptist's head on a platter.
Yes, his death was due to a seductive dance at a birthday party, and nothing else but. The depravity of man knows no bounds.
:thumbsup: I didn't word that well. What I meant to say was that John the Baptists was not beheaded because Herod threw a party. That is, when we read of John the Baptist's beheading, the moral of the story is not "don't celebrate birthdays," which is how the event was used in Jame's post.
Saying we shouldn't celebrate the birth of Christ because Herod celebrated his birthday and John the Baptist was beheaded at that party just doesn't make sense to me. I don't get the logic.
Personally, if one refrains from celebrating Christmas in order to glorify God...well, I have no problem with that. What I object to is when those who refrain object to my glorifying God through my observance of Christmas.
Last edited by a moderator:
I could be wrong however I think I am right. There two birth day parties spoken of in the word of God. One in the old and one in the new and both were the birth day of someone, opposed to the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob.
That is where soul liberty comes in. I should not be condemned or judged for my beliefs in why I do not celebrate Christmas.
As far as I am concerned you have the perfect right to celebrate Christmas in the way that you wish. We may disagree in somethings, but that is the nature of soul liberty.
It would be interesting to see how many would carry on the Christmas celebration if the following were removed: Santa Clause ie..elves, reindeer,the whole lot, decorated trees, yard lights; Winter celebratory things ie.. sleigh rides, chestnuts on open fire etc..
We see as example on the LORD's day that most can barely spare an hour to "celebrate" His resurrection. Why do you think a celebration of His birth without the "fun" secular stuff would be any different?
We see as example on the LORD's day that most can barely spare an hour to "celebrate" His resurrection. Why do you think a celebration of His birth without the "fun" secular stuff would be any different?
And there will be tares among the wheat as well. Not all who attend church weekly offer genuine worship. Why object to those who sincerely worship at Christmas simply because others are secular?