As we read the New Testament one of the things that is clear is that the old observations, feasts, and rules which were given to the Jewish people as part of the old covenant God made with them were not binding upon Christians. Those things, St. Paul tells us in Colossians, were but "shadows" which pointed to what was to come, that is, to Jesus.
That doesn't mean, however, that Christians didn't engage in various observances, practices, etc. For example, from nearly the very beginning we see that Christians began meeting together on the first day of the week. They didn't do this because God commanded them to, but rather because it made sense to meet together on the same day that Christ rose from the dead. By the end of the 1st century, in fact, the first day of the week had gotten the name "The Lord's Day" (see Revelation 1:10). In fact, even today in Greek the first day of the week is called
Kyriaki, from the old phrase
kyriake hemera, "Lord's Day".
And Christians did the same thing by setting aside certain days and times of the year for Christian observance and practice. The earliest Christian feast is Pascha (Easter), it comes directly from the Jewish Passover but was radically remolded in Christian practice. Originally there was no singular way of observing Easter, some Christian communities celebrated it on the 14th day of the Jewish month of Nissan, the same day Jews celebrate the Passover, while in other Christian communities it was always observed on a Sunday and thus was often the first Sunday after the Jewish Passover. The way which Easter is calculated today is the same way it's been done since it was standardized in the 4th century--the point was simply to allow Christians, regardless of where they lived, to be celebrating the feast of Christ's resurrection on the same day everywhere.
Another very ancient Christian feast was Epiphany (also called Theophany), this day of observance arose as Christians wanted to set aside time to celebrate the truth of Christ's coming into the world, the appearing of Christ in our midst as God made flesh, hence the names Epiphany/Theophany. This day occurs on January 6th, and is sometimes known as the Three Kings Day in the West because in the West the day has often come to focus on the arrival of the magi who brought gifts to the Child Jesus as recorded in the Gospel of Matthew. The main theme of Epiphany is Christ's baptism in the river Jordan by John the Baptist, as this was when the voice of the Father spoke from heaven "This is My beloved Son" and the Holy Spirit descended upon Jesus in the form of a dove, inaugurating His earthly ministry. For some in the past it was also a time to observe the birth of Christ. In fact, even today in the Armenian Apostolic Church (the ancient and historic Church in Armenia) the Feast of Christ's Nativity--Christmas--is January 6th, Epiphany.
So why do most Christians celebrate Christ's birth on December 25th? The answer to that is kind of interesting. So when we go back to the 3rd century we find that Christians were occasionally being curious about things, like, what day of the year did Jesus die? What day was He born? Things like that. Well something that had kind of become generally accepted was that Jesus died on March 25th. From this some early Christians began to try and figure out what day He would have been born; and a common opinion at the time was that since Jesus was perfect, His life being perfect, that He must have either been conceived on, or born on, the same day that He died. So some argued, then, that Jesus was born on March 25th, but others instead argued that Jesus had been conceived on March 25th, and then they simply added 9 months to arrive at December 25th as the day of His birth.
The celebration of Christ's Nativity didn't happen all at once in the Church, but was a practice that spread over time, and as noted above there were differences in opinion and so sometimes Christians were celebrating Christ's birth at different times. It isn't until the 5th century that an effort among Christian bishops to try and standardize the the feast of Christ's birth settled on the most common practice, that of observing Christ's birth on December 25th.
If you go online, you will come across a lot of websites and people claiming that Christmas and Easter are pagan. There's going to be a lot of claims. But it's important to notice that what basically all these people have in common when they make the "Christmas is pagan" or "Easter is pagan" kinds of claims is that they don't actually provide sources. And the few times that they do, it becomes clear that they never read the sources for themselves.
A good example of this has to do with Easter. One will find it routinely argued that Easter is pagan, because the name "Easter" comes from a pagan goddess by the same name, or more specifically an archaic form "Eoster", and they will cite the work of Bede from the 8th century. They will then go on to make further claims, such as that the goddess Eoster was worshiped as a spring fertility goddess, and eggs and hares/rabbits were symbols of her worship and fertility rites. Well, here's the thing, it is true that Bede mentions an Anglo-Saxon goddess named Eoster once worshiped before they were converted to Christianity, but that's about it.
More specifically, Bede wrote a work called the Reckoning of Time, and in it at one point he describes what the Anglo-Saxon people in Britain called the months of the year. He describes the name of each month, and offers what he believes to be the etymology of the name. The month that corresponded with the Roman April was Eosturmonath "Easter-month", and here is how Bede describes how it got its name:
"
Eosturmonath has a name which is now translated ‘‘Paschal month’’, and which was once called after a goddess of theirs named Eostre, in whose honour feasts were celebrated in that month.Now they designate that Paschal season by her name, calling the joys of the new rite by the time-honoured name of the old observance." - Ven. Bede, The Reckoning of Time, 15
That's everything, that's literally everything that Bede has to say about this subject. And we can break it down:
The Anglo-Saxons had a month called Eosturmonath, which by his time had come to be called Paschalmonath or "Paschal-month", that is, the month in which Christians observe Pascha, Christ's resurrection. The old name for the month was named after a goddess named Eostre, and he says that feasts were celebrated in that month in her honor at some point in the past. However, since the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons they no longer do so, but the month name is still used to refer to the Christian feast of Pascha, of Christ's resurrection. That is, they called the Christian celebration of the resurrection of Jesus "Easter" because that was the name of the month. In essence, it's like calling the feast of Christ's resurrection "April" because that's the name of the month it usually occurs in.
Now more should be mentioned here. Note that I said that the above quote is the only thing Bede has to say on the matter. Not only is that the only thing Bede has to say on the matter, it's literally the only thing anyone ever had to say. What I mean is, is that Bede is the only source we have. There are no historical sources or records, besides this brief comment by Bede, that the Anglo-Saxons even ever at any point worshiped a goddess by the name of Eoster. There are no archeological records, nothing in writing from either Christian or non-Christian sources, there are no carvings, or engravings, or runic markers by any Germanic pagan people who worshiped a goddess by this name, or any similar name.
That means that it's entirely possible that Bede was mistaken, that there was no goddess named Eoster at all, and the etymology for the name of the month is completely different. In fact, it may simply have been called Eosturmonath because this is the month where the sun starts to rise earlier, in the
East. So it may simply be nothing more than that this is the "dawn-month" the month where the dawn is earlier.
And what about eggs and rabbits? Or spring fertility rites? Nope, nothing there. That's something people just made up. It sounded good, I mean, a spring time fertility goddess with eggs and rabbits as symbols of renewal? That sounds like something ancient pagans might have had. But that idea is literally completely made up.
And that's the same thing, in fact, with things such as Christmas trees. The origin of the Christmas tree dates to the 15th or 16th centuries in Germany, in fact there doesn't seem to be much evidence for Christmas trees before the Protestant Reformation, and it was early Lutherans and other Protestants who really ended up popularizing the practice. So it is a practice that originated with Christians, nothing pagan about it. Evergreen trees were green through the winter, they were a symbol of life during the dead of winter, they were decorated with candles because Christ is the light of the world. Really some basic Christian symbolism.
Even the eggs and bunnies of Easter probably have Christian origins. The tradition of dying eggs comes from the Christian East, where they were dyed red. This is based on the ancient tradition that Mary Magdalene when she was preaching the Gospel in Rome once was invited to come to the house of the emperor, and ate dinner with him. He gave her the opportunity to speak to him about Jesus, and so she explained and preached the Gospel at supper. Caesar, mockingly, took a boiled egg from the table and declared, "It is more likely for this egg to turn red in my hands than for your Christ to have risen from the dead" which, at that very moment, the egg miraculously turned red. And, based on that tradition, Christians dyed eggs red during the Paschal season. The practice began in the East and spread West, where the dying of eggs (though it is no longer just red, but many colors) has remained common.
Rabbits? Well honestly rabbits are probably a common thing one sees in spring, and so rabbits are going to show up as a spring-time animal during a spring-time event (well spring in the northern hemisphere anyway). Though it is also possible that due to numerous symbolic reasons rabbits have come to be included. C.f.
Rabbits and hares in art - Wikipedia
The short version of all this is that no, these are not abominations before God. Christmas is not bad, it's good. It is the celebration of Jesus Christ, of His birth, it is the celebration of the Incarnation, the celebration of the great gift of salvation which God has given the whole world. It is beautiful and good and right. Even Santa Clause is fine, he's based loosely on the real historical St. Nicholas of Myra, a real Christian bishop who was renown for his generosity and giving of gifts as an act of Christian charity. So you don't even have to get rid of Santa, Santa can still be a wonderful symbol of Christian generosity that we should teach our children about, and it's a great way to learn and then teach about the real Nicholas, and the virtues of charity and kindness and looking out for one another. That is all very wonderfully Christian and God-honoring.
Don't let the liars out there on the internet rob you of your joy in Christ.
-CryptoLutheran