Why I Think Christmas is Not Biblical (Please read OP before posting).

[prodromos]

I asked because of your implication that I address only two feasts in a year. That is absolutely false, if it is directed toward me.

These traditions did not originate from Christianity. You can practice those, I do not say otherwise, they just did not originate from Christianity, and I can recognize this and say so. There were practices of those things a long time ago, by others while not by the Christians earlier.



This is not to mean you cannot be involved in gift giving. But I can say as already pointed out that having one day in the year meant for exchange of gifts is not from Christianity. Do so anyway, or the other practices, no one is accusing you, this just was not from Christianity but practiced originally by others before Christians were involved in the one day in the year they practice the exchange of gifts. If you choose to do that fine but don't argue with those for their not doing so for this reason of it not coming from Christianity.

Your claim that those practices arose out of paganism is false.

 

[DamianWarS]

Not the same thing. One is a device to access what you want. The other is a holiday that people partake in that has general recognized customs held to that holiday. Partaking in that holiday lets others know that you approve of it's customs.

Indeed the focus has of a mixture of pagan roots blurred with Christianity. No one is actually motivated by the pagan belief systems and most don't even know its history. For example mistletoe is steeped in fertility myths which has led to the custom of kissing under it but it's lost all its pagan meaning and is just a silly thing you do.

Paul tells us in 1 Cor 8:8 "food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do." Let's replace food with mistletoe, December 25th, Christmas trees, gift giving, etc... None of it as objects changes our position with God either way as we are free to do them. Our freedom however shouldn't come at the cost of the weak so if we lived amoung pagans who felt trees where being worshiped and orgies under a mistletoe then we should stop for their benifit. But the thing is.... No one is actually thinking that (not even close)

Since we are not actually worshiping trees or having orgies under mistletoe, nor are these things associated this way in any remote way and their net values remain wholesome then we can partake of these values as they can honor Christ. If we choose to not participate then we get the awkward questions "where's your tree" or "don't you celebrate Christmas?" What's the goal? Because we end up estranging ourselfs to our mission and called the wacky religious freaks that think Christmas is evil. That may not be your goal, but it's going to be a felt perspective and people will avoid you. This does not help advance the gospel or show others Christ, it in fact does the opposite.

We can embrace the good while discouraging the bad. The bad is not the Christmas trees, Santa clause or mistletoe. It's the greed and materialism, it's the wide depression, the lonely and the lost and those who feel discluded etc... There is real need during Christmas and we can do a lot to help others, but being anti-Christmas is a misguided focus that will not help others experience Christ.

 

[JSRG]

Where do you think the term "Christmas" comes from? Christ mass.
Its Catholic in origin.
Unless you are a Catholic, I wouldn't celebrate it.

The first mention we have of the word "Christmas" I am aware of comes from the 11th century (the first usage the Oxford English Dictionary lists is a homily by Wulfstan, an 11th century English bishop). This is obviously long after the holiday had been celebrated. Attempting to say it's "Catholic in origin" because of a name given centuries upon centuries after the fact is questionable. In many languages, the word for Christmas derives from the word birth, such as Spanish where the word is Navidad, ultimately coming from the Latin word Nativitas (birth). Greek is even more explicit, with the word being Χριστούγεννα (Christougenna), meaning "Christ birth".

 

[JSRG]

Indeed the focus has of a mixture of pagan roots blurred with Christianity. No one is actually motivated by the pagan belief systems and most don't even know its history. For example mistletoe is steeped in fertility myths which has led to the custom of kissing under it but it's lost all its pagan meaning and is just a silly thing you do.

Paul tells us in 1 Cor 8:8 "food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do." Let's replace food with mistletoe, December 25th, Christmas trees, gift giving, etc... None of it as objects changes our position with God either way as we are free to do them. Our freedom however shouldn't come at the cost of the weak so if we lived amoung pagans who felt trees where being worshiped and orgies under a mistletoe then we should stop for their benifit. But the thing is.... No one is actually thinking that (not even close)

Since we are not actually worshiping trees or having orgies under mistletoe, nor are these things associated this way in any remote way and their net values remain wholesome then we can partake of these values as they can honor Christ. If we choose to not participate then we get the awkward questions "where's your tree" or "don't you celebrate Christmas?" What's the goal? Because we end up estranging ourselfs to our mission and called the wacky religious freaks that think Christmas is evil. That may not be your goal, but it's going to be a felt perspective and people will avoid you. This does not help advance the gospel or show others Christ, it in fact does the opposite.

We can embrace the good while discouraging the bad. The bad is not the Christmas trees, Santa clause or mistletoe. It's the greed and materialism, it's the wide depression, the lonely and the lost and those who feel discluded etc... There is real need during Christmas and we can do a lot to help others, but being anti-Christmas is a misguided focus that will not help others experience Christ.

Honestly, even the idea that the tradition of kissing under the mistletoe goes back to any sort of pagan belief is very dubious. Not only is there no reference to any pagans ever doing such a thing--or, at least, no one seems capable of providing evidence--the modern practice appears to have only arisen in the last few centuries. Most Christmas traditions, in fact, are only the product of the last several centuries, which is why so many claims of those traditions somehow going back to paganism from thousands of years ago makes so little sense.

In the case of kissing under mistletoe, this certainly seems to be a (relatively) recent tradition. The first reference I am aware of is from a song in a 1784 musical comedy called "Two to One":

The Lady's Magazine; Or, Entertaining Companion for the Fair Sex, Appropriated Solely to Their Use and Amusement ...

www.google.com

"When at Christmas in the hall
The men and maids are hopping,
If by chance I hear them howl,
Amongst them quick I pop in.
When all the men, Jem, John, and Joe,
Cry, "What good-luck has sent ye?"
And kiss beneath the mistletoe,
The girl not turn’d of twenty.”

Wikipedia's article on "Viscum album" (European mistletoe) makes the claim "The earliest documented evidence of the tradition of kissing under the mistletoe dates from sixteenth century England, a custom that was apparently very popular at that time." Even if we accept this (it cites no source at all), this still only goes back to the sixteenth century, again far too late for it to come from any pagan beliefs.

 

[DamianWarS]

Honestly, even the idea that the tradition of kissing under the mistletoe goes back to any sort of pagan belief is very dubious. Not only is there no reference to any pagans ever doing such a thing--or, at least, no one seems capable of providing evidence--the modern practice appears to have only arisen in the last few centuries. Most Christmas traditions, in fact, are only the product of the last several centuries, which is why so many claims of those traditions somehow going back to paganism from thousands of years ago makes so little sense.

the practice of kissing under the mistletoe itself is not pagan but the Celts did revere the plant as having life-giving, protective and fertility properties. this may get trickled down into hybrid folklore that can eventually just look like something harmless like kissing under the mistletoe. it may be that the practice of kissing is directly related to a water downed version of fertility or that adorning it over doorways is the pagan value that protects the household and kissing under it then is adopted as a reflection of this value. There is a connection between this pagan value of the plant and modern-day practice of kissing under it, even if only because it retained a revered position and kissing under it became as a practice more serendipitously than as a direct connection to fertility or protection.

I'm not saying however don't kiss under the mistletoe because it's pagan. value for mistletoe has pagan roots but these values are stripped away and the net values that remain tend to be wholesome and easily redeemable in Christian living. What is also important is no one jumps to the pagan values in these practices so as a whole society is not influenced by these pagan values that may have once been there. Valuing the practice wouldn't cause the weak to stumble, because there is no "weak" demographic here that can have a negative effect of the pagan values. There definitely are "the weak" broadly speaking but not as it relates to these pagan values. maybe there was a few hundred years ago but today they are no more. with the example of mistletoe kissing under it has no power and there no weak demographic that would be negatively impacted by this practice.

This is the same with most if not all Christmas values like a Christmas tree, garland, stockings, Santa Clause, etc.. there simply is no weak demographic that these practices would cause them to stumble. Sure many may wag their finger but this is not the same as stumbling. Stumbling is when a person cannot separate the pagan value from the practice or object to such a point they see the pagan power overshadowing them. Someone may bring a directly cursed object by some modern-day witch in their home and feel an overpowering presence from this object. the object is nothing, it has no power, the witch is nothing, they have no power, the power comes from our ignorance and weakness in how we approach these things. We assign power to it when we believe it has power, that's the weakness. No one over the age of 10 actually thinks Santa Clause has any power, or that kissing under the mistletoe has any sort of innate magic. Society has reduced them to fairy tales and good luck charms. obsession with such things is not healthy but it is also considered unusual behaviour in society as a whole that is spoken against so there already is responsible boundaries in place innate in society which can be attributed to Judeo-Christian influence that has over powered these pagan systems.

 

[Apple Sky]

Your claim that those practices arose out of paganism is false.

No it's not, just look up Saturnalia.

This is what the LORD says: “Do not learn the ways of the nations or be terrified by the signs in the heavens, though the nations themselves are terrified by them. For the customs of the peoples are worthless; they cut down a tree from the forest; it is shaped with a chisel by the hands of a craftsman. They adorn it with silver and gold and fasten it with hammer and nails, so that it will not totter. Jeremiah 10:3

 

[DamianWarS]

No it's not, just look up Saturnalia.

This is what the LORD says: “Do not learn the ways of the nations or be terrified by the signs in the heavens, though the nations themselves are terrified by them. For the customs of the peoples are worthless; they cut down a tree from the forest; it is shaped with a chisel by the hands of a craftsman. They adorn it with silver and gold and fasten it with hammer and nails, so that it will not totter. Jeremiah 10:3

The idea I get from this verse is a totem idol by the phrase "shaped with a chisel by hands of a craftsman". I don't think a tree in tree form was the thing adorned with gold and silver but something crafted from a tree instead.

I get it, an idol is an idol, be it a wood carved totem or an unaltered tree. But I don't think the practice of a Christmas tree is connected with this Jeremiah reference even with its similarities mainly because I think in Jeremiah it is a carved out thing and not left as a tree.

I would agree however the Christmas tree does have a pagan history to it connected with the winter solstice. Since the dead of winter was generally a dark desperate time putting a tree in the house connects to protection and life giving. Evergreen trees remained green (hence "ever green") so there was an eternal quality to them being able to escape death that winter brings. The song O Tannenbaum gets some worship vipes with all this focus on the tree and "how lovely are it's branches" and the song may be based on a pagan shadow.

Those values in terms of power connected to trees are lost. We don't drag a tree into the house because we worship it or see it as an object of power to keep us alive in winter nor are those felt needs anymore. we do it because it brings us joy and is a family centered value.

It's a strange custom indeed that is mainly a western value and with that a northern hemisphere "winter" value. I live in a non western country on the equator, all my neighbours are Muslim and we have decided to still have a Christmas tree. We communicate it as a fun tradition that can be used for wholesome values, not the tree itself but the family values and various ordements that can be used to tell stories or remind us of our faith. It is received well and people are interested in experiencing some of these traditions with us, we also invite them to participate. For us we've been able to use it's attractional qualities to show Christ over counter gospel messages and it's been recieved well. But we joke about it's oddity as a tradition to help break some tension as well as educate others what our values are rooted in (and they are not rooted in a tree). If my neighbours wanted their own tree (which they haven't expressed yet) I would encourage them to be intentional with it to strengthen family and faith values over things focus on materialism or wanting to copy western things and certainly discourage any pagan values. To me the focus is still missional and I wouldn't practice it if it couldn't still be missional.

 

[prodromos]

No it's not, just look up Saturnalia.

Demonstrate the historical link between pagan celebrations of Saturnalia and Christian celebrations of the birth of Christ. Show evidence of Christians in the early centuries taking up pagan practices. You can't because it simply didn't happen. Paganism had been pretty much vanquished long before Christians began celebrating the Nativity of Christ on an annual basis and when they did it was celebrated in January. It was some time later that the date was shifted to December 25th. The various traditions associated with Christmas today did not become associated with the feast day until centuries after paganism had become a faint memory.
The claim that the traditions came from paganism has its origin in the false methodology of Alexander Hislop, and despite his claims having been thoroughly debunked, ignorant people continue to repeat them as fact.

 

[Apple Sky]

Demonstrate the historical link between pagan celebrations of Saturnalia and Christian celebrations of the birth of Christ. Show evidence of Christians in the early centuries taking up pagan practices. You can't because it simply didn't happen.

Was Jesus born on December 25th - No..........

 

[JEBofChristTheLord]

I am not concerned with any input asking and suggesting as if anything not "Biblical" (by their set of definitions of course) is therefore evil, therefore against the will of God.

However, there is a mix. The word "yule" is most certainly of unbelief. And we do well if we flinch at the terms "Christmas miracle" and "spirit of Christmas", and related, theorizing that behavior should change around Christmastime.

 

[JSRG]

the practice of kissing under the mistletoe itself is not pagan but the Celts did revere the plant as having life-giving, protective and fertility properties.

The only source we have attesting to the importance of mistletoe, including ideas of fertility, among the Celts--or more accurately, the Gauls--comes from a secondhand source, Pliny's Natural History (specifically, Chapter 95 of Book 16). He puts forth this claim:

"Upon this occasion we must not omit to mention the admiration that is lavished upon this plant by the Gauls. The Druids—for that is the name they give to their magicians1— held nothing more sacred than the mistletoe and the tree that bears it, supposing always that tree to be the robur... It is the belief with them that the mistletoe, taken in drink, will impart fecundity to all animals that are barren, and that it is an antidote for all poisons. Such are the religious feelings which we find entertained towards trifling objects among nearly all nations."

So this does mention the Druids held it in esteem and that it imparted fecundity to animals. This is secondhand information so we must be a little careful with it, but what is especially pertinent for our purposes is the fact he ascribes this to the Gauls. The Gauls resided in and around what is modern day France. There are various issues with this supposed connection, but a major one is that the kissing tradition began in England, not France, at least as far as I can gather.

this may get trickled down into hybrid folklore that can eventually just look like something harmless like kissing under the mistletoe. it may be that the practice of kissing is directly related to a water downed version of fertility or that adorning it over doorways is the pagan value that protects the household and kissing under it then is adopted as a reflection of this value.

Notice the usage of "may". That is, "it may be that the practice of kissing is directly related to a water downed version of fertility or that adorning it over doorways is the pagan value that protects the household and kissing under it then is adopted as a reflection of this value." That's because there isn't any evidence or plausible connection between the two.

There is a connection between this pagan value of the plant and modern-day practice of kissing under it, even if only because it retained a revered position and kissing under it became as a practice more serendipitously than as a direct connection to fertility or protection.

Before you admitted may... but here you claim that is a connection. But again, none can really be seen.

The argument essentially is that because around the first century AD (when Pliny wrote) the Gauls held the mistletoe in high esteem in religious ceremonies that went completely extinct, somehow that (without leaving apparently a single trace in between) led to a dramatically different practice of kissing under it long, long afterwards. And in another country at that!

The fact that Gauls may have had some affection for the plant does not mean that something significantly later involving it in a different context and a different country for that matter has any connection. It's like saying that because the Fifth Labor of Hercules involved cleaning stables (with cows), and that footballs (in American football) are made from leather, which comes from cows, that the sport of football is derived from the Fifth Labor of Hercules.

I'm not saying however don't kiss under the mistletoe because it's pagan. value for mistletoe has pagan roots but these values are stripped away and the net values that remain tend to be wholesome and easily redeemable in Christian living. What is also important is no one jumps to the pagan values in these practices so as a whole society is not influenced by these pagan values that may have once been there. Valuing the practice wouldn't cause the weak to stumble, because there is no "weak" demographic here that can have a negative effect of the pagan values. There definitely are "the weak" broadly speaking but not as it relates to these pagan values. maybe there was a few hundred years ago but today they are no more. with the example of mistletoe kissing under it has no power and there no weak demographic that would be negatively impacted by this practice.

This is the same with most if not all Christmas values like a Christmas tree, garland, stockings, Santa Clause, etc.. there simply is no weak demographic that these practices would cause them to stumble. Sure many may wag their finger but this is not the same as stumbling. Stumbling is when a person cannot separate the pagan value from the practice or object to such a point they see the pagan power overshadowing them. Someone may bring a directly cursed object by some modern-day witch in their home and feel an overpowering presence from this object. the object is nothing, it has no power, the witch is nothing, they have no power, the power comes from our ignorance and weakness in how we approach these things. We assign power to it when we believe it has power, that's the weakness. No one over the age of 10 actually thinks Santa Clause has any power, or that kissing under the mistletoe has any sort of innate magic. Society has reduced them to fairy tales and good luck charms. obsession with such things is not healthy but it is also considered unusual behaviour in society as a whole that is spoken against so there already is responsible boundaries in place innate in society which can be attributed to Judeo-Christian influence that has over powered these pagan systems.

While I'd largely agree with this, I still contend (as noted above) that few if any of these things can be traced back to paganism anyway.

 

[JSRG]

No it's not, just look up Saturnalia.

Saturnalia was a Roman holiday that, while occurring in December, did not occur at the same time as Christmas, and there is little evidence that its customs are found in modern Christmas celebrations. When people point to supposed things in Saturnalia that are found in modern Christmas celebrations, they invariably (1) aren't actually found in Saturnalia at all and are just made up, or (2) only developed so much later for Christmas (as in, the 15th century or later) that Saturnalia could hardly have been any kind of influence.

This is what the LORD says: “Do not learn the ways of the nations or be terrified by the signs in the heavens, though the nations themselves are terrified by them. For the customs of the peoples are worthless; they cut down a tree from the forest; it is shaped with a chisel by the hands of a craftsman. They adorn it with silver and gold and fasten it with hammer and nails, so that it will not totter. Jeremiah 10:3

Some people claim this refers to Christmas trees, but it doesn't make much sense. As context will reveal, this is in reference to the creation of wooden humanoid idols, not Christmas trees; that's why they take the tree down and then shape it with a chisel (not done with Christmas trees, but making sense for an idol). This is also why it goes on to stress "their idols cannot speak" and "they must be carried because they cannot walk"--again making perfect sense for a humanoid idol (because the people it is made to look like can walk and talk), but remarks that make no sense for a tree.

Especially problematic for this claim that it's about Christmas trees is that Christmas trees are a relatively recent innovation, arising around the 16th century. Notably, no one seems to have ever applied this interpretation to Christmas trees until the 20th century.

 

[DamianWarS]

While I'd largely agree with this, I still contend (as noted above) that few if any of these things can be traced back to paganism anyway.

It's a non-issue to me where the practice comes from. The fact that its origins are in dispute is further evidence that the practice is innocuous.

Everything comes from something, we just don't randomly hang specific plants in our doorways and start kissing under it. It certainly feels like a pagan mindset from some trickled-down version of pagan values that's still retained.

Even with pagan origins things also don't get randomly pick up and revered. The mistletoe had something special, or some sort of special event happened involving the plant and out of that a myth is developed. It might be some pagan group revered it, and later another group picked it up and valued it for the same primary purpose but the two are disconnected. With the evidence in dispute, I don't really care to be honest only that I would still suspect pagan influence. But so are obelisk steeples... and no one cares about that.

 

[prodromos]

Was Jesus born on December 25th - No..........

December 25th is simply the date the Church settled on to commemorate the birth of Christ, and it was chosen because it is nine months from the date the Church already commemorated Mary conceiving Christ in her womb.

 

[Apple Sky]

December 25th is simply the date the Church settled on to commemorate the birth of Christ, and it was chosen because it is nine months from the date the Church already commemorated Mary conceiving Christ in her womb.

And which church chose this date ? Hmm.

 

[prodromos]

And which church chose this date ? Hmm.

The date was chosen before Rome split off and went their own way. There was only one Church at that time.

 

[Apple Sky]

There was only one Church at that time.

And what was that ?

 

[prodromos]

And what was that ?

The Church.

 

[Apple Sky]

The Church.

Which church ?

 

[DamianWarS]

Which church ?

Christ's