- Nov 28, 2003
- 23,777
- 14,221
- 59
- Country
- Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
This is an often repeated falsehood.But the facts remain their origins, many of them, are from pagan holidays turned into Christian ones.
I figured as much. Unfortunately I can't take any of your posts seriously anymore because every time I see your name I have this image of a red head holding a sword wearing a chainmail bikini.I would like to speak more, but speaking against Catholicism does not go over too well here. So all I can do is point you to Catholic church as to the real origins of Christmas. If you are Catholic, or Eastern Orthodox there is really no point to explain to you why Christmas is wrong. Your never going to get it. The point of this thread is geared towards those who make the Bible their authority alone. But if your spiritual authority also rests outside the Bible in church traditions, then the acceptance of unbiblical holidays like Christmas are not going to be a real problem for you. So my ultimate goal was never truly to convince you but Christians who are Sola Scriptura or those who make God's Word their authority alone.
Yes, you are defending him because you are saying the name Lucas is actually Luke, etc.
Again, there are no coincidences in life.
You can just pick and choose at what you think people's names mean.
But if you were to look at the pattern of evidence, it becomes obvious.
It trumps the falsehood of the words of men, it nowhere states all oral tradition should be set aside. When Jesus says the Pharisees tradition is a falsehood he means it in the sense that their man made tradition is pointless and goes against the Torah. Yes we obey God rather then men, the concept of Church tradition is Apostolic tradition that goes generation to generation orally teaching about doctrine as in scripture or gives a more detailed view of doctrine not found in scripture. The bottom line is that it’s not tradition vs no tradition, but man made tradition vs inspired Apostolic tradition. I find it very entertaining and strange when Fundamentalists try to read the word Sola Scriptura in 2 Timothy 3:16, where do you see the word only in the verse, although scripture is profitable for doctrine, reproof, and correction the word only doesn’t exist in this verse. You’ve still not given a single verse which proves Sola Scriptura.Where have I written that we should only depend on scripture alone? Scripture however trumps the words of men.
ROMANS 3:4 4, God forbid: yes, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That you might be justified in your sayings, and might overcome when you are judged.
MATTHEW 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.
2 TIMOTHY 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness
ACTS 5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.
MATTHEW 15:3-9
[3], But he answered and said to them, Why do you also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
[4], For God commanded, saying, Honor your father and mother: and, He that curses father or mother, let him die the death.
[5], But you say, Whoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatever you might be profited by me;
[6], And honor not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have you made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
[7], You hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
[8], This people draws near to me with their mouth, and honors me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
[9], But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Yep looks like the Word of God trumps the words of men.
A question for the date crowd. I have heard the "Christmas is pagan because a pagan holiday is on December 25th. Quick question. I was born on April 30. Hitler killed himself on April 30. Washington was inaugurated president on April 30th. Many historical events happened on April 30.
Now when I was a little boy and my parents put a cake in front of me saying "Happy Birthday" were they celebrating Washington's inauguration since that happened first, were they celebrating Hitler's death because it marked the end of Nazism, or were they celebrating my birthday because, you know, it was my birthday party? I was only a kid so I suppose there may have been people they had to disinvite who were claiming that the REAL reason my birthday party was being had was to honor Washington, but I and my friends were pretty convinced it was because I had turned a year older.
Pedantic dating arguments are an exercise in absurdity. If you want to know what the party is about, look at the banner. I checked in our manger and I didn't see a plastic baby Saturn doll sitting there, so I think we're good.
It trumps the falsehood of the words of men, it nowhere states all oral tradition should be set aside. When Jesus says the Pharisees tradition is a falsehood he means it in the sense that their man made tradition is pointless and goes against the Torah. Yes we obey God rather then men, the concept of Church tradition is Apostolic tradition that goes generation to generation orally teaching about doctrine as in scripture or gives a more detailed view of doctrine not found in scripture. The bottom line is that it’s not tradition vs no tradition, but man made tradition vs inspired Apostolic tradition. I find it very entertaining and strange when Fundamentalists try to read the word Sola Scriptura in 2 Timothy 3:16, where do you see the word only in the verse, although scripture is profitable for doctrine, reproof, and correction the word only doesn’t exist in this verse. You’ve still not given a single verse which proves Sola Scriptura.
Sola Scriptura literally means by scripture alone, If the doctrine was true it wouldn’t be hard to find it in the Bible somewhere. All those verses prove the value of scripture not its value as the sole authority. There’s a difference between man made tradition and Apostolic tradition. No Apostolic tradition breaks the commandments of God.There is nothing wrong with traditions by themselves so to speak. The question that needs to be considered is what makes tradition wrong? That answer is clearly given by JESUS in MATTHEW 15:3-9 and that is when we follow the teachings and traditions of men that break the commandments of GOD because we have taken our own teachings and traditions as a substitute to God's WORD. When we do this Jesus says we are not following God. You were posted 11 scriptures that teach that only God's WORD is true and we should believe and follow it above all others *ROMANS 3:4; MATTHEW 4:4; 2 TIMOTHY 3:16; ACTS 5:29; MATTHEW 15:3-9. I think that is enough sola scriptura don't you? Weather you believe God's Word or not. It is between you and God as these are God's WORDS not mine. In that case your argument is with God and not me.
Christmas does not have pagan origins. Christmas is a day set aside to celebrate the Incarnation. That God, the creator of all that is, entered into human life. God stooped so low as to become an earthling like us. It's beyond imagination that the Creator of all entered life here on this dust spec and lived among us, became one of us. God chose to become a one celled human zygote . Could God stoop any lower? Could God raise human life any higher? I find it very appropriate to celebrate the day that God entered into human life. The day God breathed air for the first time for us is a great day. I just can't fathom people putting petty details over that fact so as to deny celebating the greatness of that day. To deny that day as a Holi-day.I would like to speak more, but speaking against Catholicism does not go over too well here. So all I can do is point you to Catholic church as to the real origins of Christmas. If you are Catholic, or Eastern Orthodox there is really no point to explain to you why Christmas is wrong. Your never going to get it. The point of this thread is geared towards those who make the Bible their authority alone. But if your spiritual authority also rests outside the Bible in church traditions, then the acceptance of unbiblical holidays like Christmas are not going to be a real problem for you. So my ultimate goal was never truly to convince you but Christians who are Sola Scriptura or those who make God's Word their authority alone.
It's good to celebrate what the Resurrection is contingent on. No Incarnation no Resurrection.As someone in this thread has already said, the focus of Christmas isn't about the resurrection
I am not the one picking and choosing. Please find a Spanish Bible and turn to the third Gospel. You will find that it is the Gospel of 'Lucas'. Turn to verses mentioning Satan and you will find it is written 'Satanas' and Lucifer is 'Lucero'. And you will probably find on the front cover, the words 'Santa Biblia', meaning Holy Bible.
Claiming that Lucas and Lucifer mean the same because they have three of the same letters is as logical as claiming that the words 'wicked' and 'kind' mean the same because they have three of the same letters. (It also leaves you on very dodgy ground, because guess whose name includes three letters which are also found in 'Satan'?!) You have been looking at words in two different languages and treating them as if they are from the same language - it just doesn't work.
Lucas is not an English name. So comparing it to the English word 'Lucifer' is inaccurate. You are being offensive to those people from non-English-speaking countries whose names are Lucas or Santa by implying that these names are somehow Satanic. If you cannot see that, then I do not think there is any point continuing this discussion.We are not talking about Spanish or some other language. We are talking about what those words mean in English. Jesus is a name of a regular person in Spanish. But in English, it is the name of our Savior. Big difference here. Not all languages were meant to be a universal cohesive language. At the tower of babel the languages were separated and they were not unified.
Christmas does not have pagan origins. Christmas is a day set aside to celebrate the Incarnation. That God, the creator of all that is, entered into human life. God stooped so low as to become an earthling like us. It's beyond imagination that the Creator of all entered life here on this dust spec and lived among us, became one of us. God chose to become a one celled human zygote . Could God stoop any lower? Could God raise human life any higher? I find it very appropriate to celebrate the day that God entered into human life. The day God breathed air for the first time for us is a great day. I just can't fathom people putting petty details over that fact so as to deny celebating the greatness of that day. To deny that day as a Holi-day.
It's good to celebrate what the Resurrection is contingent on. No Incarnation no Resurrection.
Lucas is not an English name. So comparing it to the English word 'Lucifer' is inaccurate. You are being offensive to those people from non-English-speaking countries whose names are Lucas or Santa by implying that these names are somehow Satanic. If you cannot see that, then I do not think there is any point continuing this discussion.
(And Jesus is also the name of our Saviour in Spanish)
If they do, they will be lying. You are taking a word that is used to praise God in another tongue and claiming it for the devil. Such arrogance, to assume that English is THE language, before which all others must give way. I am done with this discussion - there is no point continuing to talk to someone who is so xenophobic.Look. Just ask an ex Satanist turned Christian and they will be able to help confirm to you these things in regards to the enemy's name.
All meaningless, irrelevant obfuscation. The fact that one thing is similar to another thing does NOT prove derivation. You have failed, and always will fail, to provide even one sliver of credible, verifiable, historical evidence that anything about the Christian observance of the birth of Christ was taken from any pagan practice. Wreaths, trees, mistletoe etc. are all irrelevant. They are not part of the Christian observance. Christians are not responsible for how non-Christians decorate at Christmas or any other time. And just for your info your out-of-context proof text has nothing to do with decorated trees which did not exist and which nobody worshiped.First, you need to understand that Christmas is a Catholic or Roman holiday.
Why do you think they call it Christmas? Christ mass. The mass of Christ.
If you are Catholic, I suppose this is not a problem for you.
Second, as for your claim that Christmas is about a day to celebrate the Incarnation:
Well, try telling that to the majority of those who celebrate it.
Ask them what they think Christmas means.
Most are concerned with buying gifts and gathering with their families.
It really is not about celebrating Christ's birth, although there may be a select small few who may do that. The holiday is focused on greed and materialism.
If not, then tell the children in the neighborhood that they are not getting any presents this year and that they are going to give those presents to the poor and they are going to honor Jesus and His birth instead. See what their reaction will be. I don't think they would be all to happy to hear that.
Three, as for pagan elements in Christmas:
Again, Wiccans today believe trees are sacred or magical objects. Also, tree worship was a problem through out history, as well. To say that we can imitate what Jeremiah 10:2-4 warns us about is kind of silly if you ask me. Sure, you may think it could be just talking about regular carved idols of men or animals. But this passage can also be read plainly as just talking about not putting trees in your home and decorating them, too. Why take the chance on displeasing God on such a thing? What if I was wrong on my interpretation on that passage? I would rather be safe, then sorry. Plus, it is a well known fact that wreaths and mistletoes are of pagan origin. Even if we say that we do not worship these things, it is kind of odd that we would want to have anything to do with pagan things in our honor of Christ's birth. Then to make matters worse, we are saying that we are going to worship Jesus on a day that other pagan gods are worshiped and we are going to worship on a day that a popular pagan festival took place. To top it off, we can tell our children lies about some Santa guy in how he was the one bringing the gifts to them, when it really was us doing that.
So I am flabbergasted as to how you cannot see that Christmas is not pagan.
There are many.... and I mean many Christians (including Pat Robertson) that know Christmas is clearly pagan and they simply do not care. Even people in this thread have admitted that Christmas has pagan elements in it, and they say they are going to still celebrate it, anyways.
Sorry, I don't want to honor my Lord with pagan things in any way.
If they do, they will be lying. You are taking a word that is used to praise God in another tongue and claiming it for the devil. Such arrogance, to assume that English is THE language, before which all others must give way. I am done with this discussion - there is no point continuing to talk to someone who is so xenophobic.
All meaningless, irrelevant obfuscation. The fact that one thing is similar to another thing does NOT prove derivation. You have failed, and always will fail, to provide even one sliver of credible, verifiable, historical evidence that anything about the Christian observance of the birth of Christ was taken from any pagan practice. Wreaths, trees, mistletoe etc. are all irrelevant. They are not part of the Christian observance. Christians are not responsible for how non-Christians decorate at Christmas or any other time. And just for your info your out-of-context proof text has nothing to do with decorated trees which did not exist and which nobody worshiped.
Jeremiah 10:3-5The anti-Christmas crowd quote this passage out-of-context pretending that it is referring to decorated trees. Decorated trees are not expected to speak, pagan deities are. Decorated trees do not move, pagan deities are expected to. Decorated trees do not do anything, good or evil, pagan deities are expected to do things for their followers. Now let us read the rest of the passage which the anti-Christmas crowd ignores.
(3) For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.
(4) They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.
(5) They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.
Jeremiah 10:8-9The poor people who cannot afford an idol made completely of gold or silver, cut down a tree have it carved into their idol then cover it with silver or gold plates. Decorated trees don’t have robes of blue and purple, kings and idols do. Now let’s read the parallel passage in Isaiah who was a contemporary of Jeremiah
(8) But they are altogether brutish and foolish: the stock is a doctrine of vanities.
(9) Silver spread into plates is brought from Tarshish, and gold from Uphaz, the work of the workman, and of the hands of the founder: blue and purple is their clothing: they are all the work of cunning men.
Jeremiah 10:11
(11) Thus shall ye say unto them, The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth, even they shall perish from the earth, and from under these heavens.
Isaiah 40:19-20There is no record in the OT of any pagan people worshipping decorated trees but they did worship graven images, idols made in the image of men or beasts.
(19) The workman melteth a graven image, and the goldsmith spreadeth it over with gold, and casteth silver chains.
(20) He that is so impoverished that he hath no oblation chooseth a tree that will not rot; he seeketh unto him a cunning workman to prepare a graven image, that shall not be moved.
Isaiah 44:13-17
(13) The carpenter stretcheth out his rule; he marketh it out with a line; he fitteth it with planes, and he marketh it out with the compass, and maketh it after the figure of a man, according to the beauty of a man; that it may remain in the house.
(14) He heweth him down cedars, and taketh the cypress and the oak, which he strengtheneth for himself among the trees of the forest: he planteth an ash, and the rain doth nourish it.
(15) Then shall it be for a man to burn: for he will take thereof, and warm himself; yea, he kindleth it, and baketh bread; yea, he maketh a god, and worshippeth it; he maketh it a graven image, and falleth down thereto.
(16) He burneth part thereof in the fire; with part thereof he eateth flesh; he roasteth roast, and is satisfied: yea, he warmeth himself, and saith, Aha, I am warm, I have seen the fire:
(17) And the residue thereof he maketh a god, even his graven image: he falleth down unto it, and worshippeth it, and prayeth unto it, and saith, Deliver me; for thou art my god.
<Jas>People of the Christian faith who celebrate Christmas would even disagree with you on this one (Including Pat Robertson). They believe all these things are pagan and they basically are saying they don't care. History channel, Catholic encyclopedia, etc., etc. all testify to the pagan things in Christmas. Most simply do not care and celebrate it anyways because they like the gift exchanging aspect of it with their family. For most people who celebrate Christmas: Jesus has very little to nothing to do with the reason why the celebrate this holiday.<end>begin
I don't really care what a lot of people say. This ain't the Kavanaugh hearing. What I want to see is credible, verifiable, historical evidence which clearly shows that something pagan was deliberately incorporated into Christian practice. That would be something written at or near the time of the events by a participant or direct observer.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?