Why do we do things not written in the Bible?

You may celebrate the Feast of the Nativity, or not, using whatever calendar you please. Romans 14 applies here. But I did want to object to one thing: the quote "Peace on Earth and Goodwill to all men" is a paraphrase of Luke 2:14, so it is actually in the Bible and is related to the birth of Jesus.

Bro.T said:

If Jesus is the reason for the season, then why didn't He let us know when to celebrate his birth?

Click to expand...

2Co 5:16 Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer.

Jesus is seated as King next to The Father of Glory, we know Him above where He is.

Merry Christmas!

In the overall chapter of John 10:1-42, the Lord speaks of being the good shepherd in John 10:14. This was during Chanukah ( the dedication) of when the Temple was cleansed by the Maccabeans ( John 10:22-23). It seems possible that at least a few shepherds may have tended their sheep at this time. I believe Chanukah ( as is Passover or “Easter”) is on a lunar calendar which is why it shifts on our solar calendar. The date is fixed on the lunar calendar at 25th of the month “Chislev”. This day is recorded in 2nd Maccabees 10:5 ( the month of Chislev was known as “Casleu” in the KJV): See 2 Maccabees 10:1-10.


Why is a pagan association made with the tradition of the date of the Lord’s Nativity when He fulfilled the exact opposite? The opposite being the Temple being rededicated from a pagan abomination.

Bro.T said:

“Tis the season to be jolly.” Peace on Earth and Goodwill to all men. These are sayings associated with Christmas, the day that Jesus the Christ was born; or was it? Certainly this could be a description of Christmas. Celebrations such as these were taking place among non-Christians centuries before Jesus Christ was born! Such customs do not come from the Bible. They have nothing to do with the birth of Jesus Christ. Jesus did not originate them, nor were they observed by the prophets (Old Testament) or the apostles (New Testament). We're going to examine Christmas, its origin and customs, and see if in fact Christmas is of God or Pagan. Should it be Celebrated or Rejected?

Peace on Earth and Goodwill to all men. Why, because we feed and shelter the less fortunate on this one day called Christmas? Shouldn't we care for the less fortunate all year long? Retailers increase the prices on merchandise, to try to recover from poor sales from the 1st three-quarters of the fiscal year.

Christmas (December 25th) is taught to be the day that Jesus the Christ was born. The fact is Jesus was not even born in the winter season. When Jesus was born, "there were shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night." (Luke 2:8). This could never have occurred in Judea in the month of December. The shepherds always brought their flocks from the mountainsides and fields and corralled them no later than October, to protect them from the cold, rainy season that followed. Notice in Songs of Solomon 2:11 and Ezra 10:9, 13, that winter was a rainy season and typically the herds would most likely not be out in the rainy winter season. "It was an ancient custom among Jews of those days to send out their sheep to the fields and deserts about the Passover (early spring), and bring them home at commencement of the first rain," says the Adam Clarke Commentary (Vol. 5, page 370, New York ed.) Continuing, "During the time they were out, the shepherds watched them night and day. As..the first rain began early in the month of Marchesvan, which answers to part of our October and November (begins sometime in October), we find that the sheep were kept out in the open country during the whole summer. And, as these shepherds had not yet brought home their flocks, it is a presumptive argument that October had not yet commenced, and that, consequently, Jesus was not born on December 25th, when no flocks were out in the fields; nor could He have been born later than September, as the flocks were in the fields by night.

Therefore, to celebrate Jesus' birth date on December 25th is not scripturally sound. Any encyclopedia will tell you that Christ was not born on December 25th. The exact date of Jesus' birth is entirely unknown, as all authorities acknowledge - though by reading the scriptures, it strongly indicates His birth was in the early fall, probably September, approximately six months after Passover. This can also be found in the Catholic Encyclopedia 1967.

Some may say, "It does not matter when He was born. I am just celebrating His birth."; whereas others may say "Jesus is the reason for the season." Is that really the case? If Jesus is the reason for the season, then why didn't He let us know when to celebrate his birth? We claim we love Jesus so much but why don't we observe his death as he commanded us. Luke 22:19, "And he took bread, and gave thanks, and break it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me."

Click to expand...

It wouldn't be Christmas without the yearly reminder that it is a Pagan holiday. Well, I look at it this way, I believe I am in line with what Jesus Christ of Nazareth said about " extra " activity done in His name:

Luke
'Master, we saw someone casting out demons in Your name, and we forbade him because he does not follow with us.' But Jesus said to him, 'Do not forbid him, for he who is not against us is on our side.'"

I feel very confident that choosing a random day celebrating in His name while sharring love to one another is on His side!
.

Thanks for sharing.
Be blessed

Because of the sin nature and this is the same reason people distort or not believe other areas of The Bible. The main one and most important, is the adding to simply belief in Jesus for Eternal Life. Actions that people must do and the list of these is a long one depending on the denomination.

I was never taught that December 25 was the birth date of Jesus. I don't see the problem with celebrating his birth just because it's not in the bible.

I don't understand the lecture but I really don't care about it all that much, either.

Celebrate it or don't?

Bro.T said:

If you notice, many Christians today celebrate the Roman Catholic tradition of Lent. Historically, Lent, was not celebrated by Protestant churches.

Click to expand...

To my knowledge, the Lutheran and Anglican churches continued to observe the seasons of the church year -- including the season of Lent -- throughout the Reformation and into the centuries that followed.

Im glad the celebration of Jesus overshadowed and overtook the pagan festivals. I can celebrate Jesus any day.

Looks like a party to me .. Luke 2:8-14, the biggest celebration in the world, to date, in fact. So, I see no reason to stop the celebration that began with the shepherds and the heavenly host over two millennia ago, even if we're not sure of the exact day, or season, or year of His birth (and even though the principal focus of many, or even most of these celebrations is not where it should be, on Him).

Should we not also be amazed and thrilled that He is remembered, and His birth is celebrated, all around the world each year, and that even by many who don't know Him personally (at least not yet anyway).

Merry Christmas!!

--David

Bro.T said:

Nice try, but the feast of dedication is totally different from Christmas Pagan festival. I'm going to post a history of where Christmas came from.

Click to expand...

Nice try? Why is seeing the hope for the redemption of fallen creation in the Lord’s incarnation a nice try? Why regurgitate overthrown paganism to undercut the hope of redemption ( Romans 8:18-25)? The words of Paul show us if we properly know where creation stands with our Creator ( Colossians 1:15-19) , we should be able to know whatever is good or not ( Philippians 4:8-9).

Bro.T said:

Nice try, but the feast of dedication is totally different from Christmas Pagan festival. I'm going to post a history of where Christmas came from.

Click to expand...

If you are going to parrot a bunch of internet conspiracy theories then you'll be wasting your time.

There are a lot of us here on Christian Forums who have gone through this dog and pony show dozens of times, and we have working, real historical knowledge of the history of Christmas--there's nothing Pagan about it.

So don't waste your time and ours regurgitating online conspiracy theories.

Merry CHRISTmas!!!!

Two questions:

1) Do you reject the entirety of the church year (Advent/Christmas/Epiphany/Lent/Easter/Pentecost), or just Christmas?

2) The Nimrod stuff sounds like what's in The Two Babylons. You're not using that for a source, are you?

The birth of Jesus the Christ was assigned the date of December 25th, because on this day, as the sun began its return to the northern skies, the pagan devotees of Mithra celebrated the dies natalis Solis Invicti (birthday of the invincible sun).

Click to expand...

Nope.

Here are the actual facts:

The Romans worshiped the sun as a relatively minor god (named Sol, literally "sun"). The epithet Invictus ("the invincible") was an epithet applied to many gods, such as Jupiter and Hermes.

In the early 3rd century Christians were already discussing when Jesus was born. Christians were pretty unanimous in agreement that Jesus died on March 25th; so discussion on Jesus' birth revolved around March 25th. Jewish tradition argued that prophets lived "perfect" lives--they died on the same day they were born. So rabbinical texts such as the Talmud argued that Moses died on the same day he was born. Early Christians also felt inclined to argue that Jesus (obviously greater than Moses) having died on March 25th may also have been born on March 25th. Though others argued that Jesus had been conceived on March 25th. Well add a perfect nine months to March 25th and that's December 25th. These conversations were going on in the early 3rd century. And that's important because:

It wasn't until the reign of Aurelian in the late 3rd century that we start to see a greater emphasis put on the sun god Sol. Remember, Sol was a minor Roman god.

Was Mithras identified with Sol? Well...sort of, maybe, but not really. Mithras was sometimes treated as a solar deity, but in Mithraic art Mithras and Sol are often shown together. More importantly, we actually know very little about Roman Mithraism. Mithraism was a mystery religion, that means that beliefs and practices were restricted to those who had undergone a rite of initiation. And so we are left largely only with Mithraic art in the archeological record, with surprisingly little written material. So, for example, the claim that Mithras was born on December 25th has no basis in the archeological or ancient written record. It's a total modern fabrication. The point is we have remarkably little information about the Mithras cult, and so few of the modern claims have real historical merit--they are largely the result of 19th century pareidolia and grasping at straw.

Was there a Dies Natalis Sol Invicti? Well yes, probably. In the Chronograph of 354, a collection of calendar texts which belonged to a Christian living in Rome which are for the year 354 (hence the 354) there is a single line that mentions that on December 25th there is a Natalis Invicti "birth of the invincible" and this is probably a reference to a celebration for Sol Invictus. This is the earliest historical attestation to a "birthday" for Sol Invictus. The Chronograph also mentions two other Sol celebrations, one on August 28th and another a multi-day celebration in October, which is clearly the most important of the three.

So we are left with this information:

1) Christians were discussing Jesus' birthday as being on December 25th since beginning of the 3rd century, well over a century before the first mention of a Natalis [Sol] Invicti.

2) December 25th wasn't the most important celebration for Sol, so if anything December 25th was a minor Sol-related holiday. We have no way of knowing exactly when the earliest celebration of the Dies Natalis may have been, but it can't pre-date Aurelian c. 274 AD, still decades after Christians were talking about Jesus' birth on December 25th.

3) The claim that Christians borrowed, copied, or were trying to replace a pagan holiday (Dies Natalis Sol Invicti) with Christmas is objectively false. It would make more sense if pagans were actually trying to co-opt Christmas for their Sol holiday. Though most likely neither were copying or co-opting, the two days arose entirely independently without any relation whatsoever to each other. Which may seem like a weird coincidence until we remember that in the ancient Roman world December 25th was also the winter solstice--this wasn't a religiously significant anything. It's just how it was marked on the calendar in the ancient world, the same way we mark the solstices and equinoxes today. Pagans don't own a monopoly on keeping time or natural phenomenon. So it is very likely that two entirely independent religious traditions emerged, one Christian and one pagan, with different rationales behind them. And the reason why they both ended up on December 25th is because it's the solstice, and both Christians and pagans were perfectly capable of recognizing symbolic importance in that time of year.

How could Christians do this? Easy.

Both in the Bible and in Christian hymns we find Christ described in solar metaphor. For example, the resurrection of Jesus being compared to the rising sun of a new day. Or in Malachi 4:2 where we read about "the sun of righteouness rising with healing in its wings", understood by Christians to be a prophetic Christological passage: Jesus is the sun of righteousness.

I am not even going to bother addressing the Nimrod stuff. That's Alexander Hislop nonsense and isn't even worth using as toilet paper.

This is a very good take, from a liturgical and historical scholar, on the dating of Christmas: Dating Christmas

The conclusion: "the origin of the date of Christmas is probably owed more directly to Judaism than to paganism, and the growth in the importance of the feast is more directly connected with deepening reflection by Christians of the early centuries on the significance of the event it commemorated."