Should Christians Recognize and Participate on Christmas?

[betsy]

When was Jesus born? No one can really say.

The Christmas that we know now began as a christian version of a pagan ritual.

Pagan worship is not in accordance with the wish of God - in fact, we had been warned about that.

The christmas celebrations now are still paganistic in so many ways. Christians try to cling to our own interpretation of this celebration....but aren't we just trying to make an excuse? Justifying its continued existence when there is no more threat of persecutions?

So, aren't we committing a grave insult to God by participating in this christmas celebration?

Edited August 18, 2007 by betsy

[cybercoma]

God's not real, so no... everyone should continue to make an excuse to spend time at the end of December showing their friends and family they love them.

[jefferiah]

When was Jesus born? No one can really say.

The Christmas that we know now began as a christian version of a pagan ritual.

Pagan worship is not in accordance with the wish of God - in fact, we had been warned about that.

The christmas celebrations now are still paganistic in so many ways. Christians try to cling to our own interpretation of this celebration....but aren't we just trying to make an excuse? Justifying its continued existence when there is no more threat of persecutions?

So, aren't we committing a grave insult to God by participating in this christmas celebration?

Well, I guess that's a matter of personal conviction, Betsy. The way I see it, the intent behind Christmas is not to celebrate pagan beliefs. I mean the simple fact is what they did was take a pagan holiday season and changed it. This way you get to keep the holidays. And as Cybercoma says "You get to spend time with your family." It's hard to do that if you don't have a common holiday.

Now if September 15 were declared by some strange cult to be Nero Day, would that make Sept. 15 an evil day? They do not have the monopoly on deciding the meaning of September 15 anymore than Christians or pagans ever did on deciding the meaning of the 25th. Or if today were some sort of Wiccan Holiday it would not be an evil day for me.....the day is just the day. Wiccans do not own the day nor its meaning. And I honestly don't think that the hearts of Christians are acting in worship of a pagan deity because they eat a nice meal together. But, this is just my opinion now. You know you have to make up your own mind on this matter.

As for the materialism angle----If you wish to think of Santa Claus as being a bad addition and commercialism and materialism as being bad additions to the meaning of Christmas, I can understand that. I worked at Wal-Mart when I was younger during the Christmas rush. This particular year the "Tickle Me Elmo" was a video game called Pokemon Yellow. A shipment would come in, and it would be sold out in an hour. My shifts usually started at midday or afternoon and so on days when it would come in I would not even arrive in time to have a chance to sell one. I can remember one customer----you know, he looked like he was going to faint when I told him (I am sure he looked at Toys R Us and every other place possible). He puts his hands on me and says "What am I going to do? What, tell me what?"

(I finally did get the opportunity to sell one. I arrived at work one day, during the last week of the rush, and there was one copy left. If you work in a busy store like that, you know how rude people can be. You know, for all the bad things some people wanted to say about Wal-Mart, its the customers who make you feel like slave labour at times. So anyways when I arrived at work my fellow "associates" in the electronics dept. said to me (manager included), "Jeff, you take cash today. The last Pokemon yellow is under the desk. If someone comes in and asks for it and rubs you the wrong way, looks at you the wrong way....tell him there's none left. Sell it to someone nice."

So Christmas puts a lot of pressure on some people. But I know people who know how to balance that out, and some parents do a good job of teaching children that some people are going to get more expensive gifts than you do. That's a reality in life, and people do not have to make it out to be such a sad thing. If you don't believe in materialism then you do not need to complain when someone has a lot of material. Jealousy shows that one is materialistic. I know parents who will break the bank and go into debt to perform on Christmas and parents who are more frugal and expect their kids to understand. And the kids understand. You don't teach em understanding by allowing them to push you around and guilt you for not getting them as much as the guy who has three vehicles gets for his kids. When he gets them more he is doing what he is able to reasonably do with the ammount of money he has. And kids of frugal parents can learn to be content.

But then I have nothing against parents getting some gifts for their kids---it can be pretty fun, and exciting for kids.

Bah, eh, you know what though Betsy....I hate decorating, myself. I could have a nice meal without having a tree up and worrying about silly lights. I am not a big fan of Christmas----but I am still going to eat the turkey. And if I get a new cd or a new book or a shirt out of it.....well hey, thats just a nice bonus.

[cybercoma]

Good post Jeff. I just didn't like how you were calling other beliefs 'evil' though. Flying airplanes into office buildings when people are arriving for work is evil, gassing an entire segment of your populace because they disagree with you is evil, blowing yourself up on a crowded bus is evil, but believing in different deities.... not something I would consider evil.

Now certainly you wouldn't go around killing these "evil" pagans, but its the kind of thinking that you're exhibiting with this post that drives some to justify murder and abuse because they're just evil ________ (insert differing view). It's God's will that we eliminate evil from the world, etc.

Scary stuff indeed.

[jefferiah]

Good post Jeff. I just didn't like how you were calling other beliefs 'evil' though. Flying airplanes into office buildings when people are arriving for work is evil, gassing an entire segment of your populace because they disagree with you is evil, blowing yourself up on a crowded bus is evil, but believing in different deities.... not something I would consider evil.

Now certainly you wouldn't go around killing these "evil" pagans, but its the kind of thinking that you're exhibiting with this post that drives some to justify murder and abuse because they're just evil ________ (insert differing view). It's God's will that we eliminate evil from the world, etc.

Scary stuff indeed.

Two different things, Cybercoma. A is not always B. Believing something is wrong does not mean you have to bomb it. You don't return evil with evil.

You understand that what wiccans believe is heretical to Christianity. That does not mean I am going to go roast some Wiccans, but it means I can't believe 2 plus 2 is 4, and also 2 plus 2 is 5 at the same time. I am not an ecumenicalist. That does not mean I dislike other people, it means I don't agree always. It means that I can't believe in Isis and also believe that Yahweh is the one true God.

The Inquisition burned heretics and tried to control them. In fact, maybe they didnt even believe in God at all, but rather believed in their own power and that they knew how to keep the herd in control. Jesus did not. He was killed. He did not make people follow him by using militant means. He said what he believed. You could listen or you could pass him by.

Edited August 19, 2007 by jefferiah

[cybercoma]

The point I was making is that what you perceive as being wrong, isn't actually anymore wrong than what you believe. You can't say they're wrong without proving it and by doing so you would prove that your faith is also wrong.

Oh and by perceiving their beliefs as being "evil" is justification, for some, to eradicate that evil. It's just not healthy to perpetuate that perception.

Edited August 19, 2007 by cybercoma

[jefferiah]

The point I was making is that what you perceive as being wrong, isn't actually anymore wrong than what you believe. You can't say they're wrong without proving it and by doing so you would prove that your faith is also wrong.

I dont have to prove it. I believe it for one thing, and I cant believe that one is right and the other is right at the same time. It does not gel.

Betsy is a Christian, I assume. So her question is, is it ok to celebrate Christmas when it was originally a pagan holiday. Paganism is not right if you are a Christian. So is it ok? I said I think it is ok. But I don;t know either, I mean its up to her and how she feels about it. I said that even though paganism is antithetical to Christianity (in fact the sentiment of the Pagan is "Do what thou wilt" which is just an ancient manifestation of will to power) pagans do not own the day itself. They don't own trees. And if they had a ceremony where they drank water I would not stop drinking it.

You have to accept that disagreeing with things does not imply you must attack them or hurt them. I understand your concern about people getting hurt, but people must have the freedom to have views which oppose, even when they cause division and strife and wars among people who are reactive.

If you cannot accept Christianity I cannot change that. Look at the question from a Christian perspective. Since you know about Christianity and you know that there is no room for other gods in the life of a Christian, then try to answer her from a Christian perspective.

[jefferiah]

The point I was making is that what you perceive as being wrong, isn't actually anymore wrong than what you believe. You can't say they're wrong without proving it and by doing so you would prove that your faith is also wrong.

Oh and by perceiving their beliefs as being "evil" is justification, for some, to eradicate that evil. It's just not healthy to perpetuate that perception.

No, the justification is believing that you must eradicate evil with the sword, which is not what Jesus taught. But he did have a clear meaning.

[jefferiah]

I another thread, you stated that, though an atheist, you do believe in morality and altruism.

Well in order to have morals-----there must be a good and an evil. The nature of morality itself or a belief in personal moral morality implies that something is evil. Now if someone violated a moral standard of yours, perhaps a Cybercomistic Heresy, you would not necessarily put a brick through their window, burn them at the stake, or draw them and quarter them.

So let me say this again---morality implies evil.

Jesus was very very strict and yet at the same time more merciful than anyone else. Even adultery of the mind was an impurity. And sin did not come from outside but from the evil hearts of men, he said. So when I call a belief evil (which you would insist is relative to my opinion) it is no different than calling anything else evil. If we don't stone the adulteress, we dont burn the witch. And I am an adulterer Cybercoma and I have commited heresies myself. Now your argument is that some people might seek to eradicate evildoers. From a personal perspective, even if you dont share my view, is that ever a reason to change your morals. If we stop calling things evil because some people might attempt to eradicate evil by force (or use it as justification as you say) then we must also drop morality itself, which you yourself feel is important, because it implies that certain things are evil or bad, distasteful, and there is always a chance that someone might see justification in morality for eradicating someone. And without morality, there is justification for absolutely everything, Cybercoma.

Edited August 19, 2007 by jefferiah

[Drea]

I have a problem with the use of the word "evil" in this thread.

The opposite of good is bad, not evil.

Evil is the opposite of saintly.

No one is evil but people are bad. No one is saintly but people are good.

Jesus (the jury is still out on whether or not he actually existed btw) did try to teach the bad (not evil) people of his era to be nice to one another, to be "good" people (not saintly).

[Guest American Woman]

I have a problem with the use of the word "evil" in this thread.

The opposite of good is bad, not evil.

I was just going to say the same thing-- that I have a problem with the use of the term "evil." As you said, the opposite of good is bad and by the same token, the opposite of right is wrong, not evil. For example, if a minor drinks, that's against the law so it's wrong, but it's not evil.

Edited August 19, 2007 by American Woman

[ft.niagara]

So, aren't we committing a grave insult to God by participating in this christmas celebration?

Since betsy does not believe in God or Christ, why should she be interested in whether or not it is an insult to something that does not exist. except to deprive others the opportunity to celebrate an event?

Same goes for the evil and bad arguement, what does it matter if there is no evil, or bad, just relevance.

[jefferiah]

Since betsy does not believe in God or Christ, why should she be interested in whether or not it is an insult to something that does not exist. except to deprive others the opportunity to celebrate an event?

Same goes for the evil and bad arguement, what does it matter if there is no evil, or bad, just relevance.

When did Betsy say she did not believe in God or Jesus, Ft. Niagara? She defends Christianity on other threads. I rather think her question was from that perspective.

Edited August 19, 2007 by jefferiah

[ft.niagara]

When did Betsy say she did not believe in God or Jesus, Ft. Niagara? She defends Christianity on other threads. I rather think her question was from that perspective.

Jefferiah, perhaps you are right, and the post well intentioned. It is just that Christmas has been under attack for so long by secular humanists, that the paganistic arguement appeared/appears to be another attack. The exact date is unknown, the date was chosen to be a counter to popular pagan rituals of the day. As far as God's opinion, I would think that he would look more favorably upon attention than benign neglect.

There are alot of things which I find questionable, especially in the RC version of christianity, but when you question the practice of praying to favority saints, or confession to a priest for example, sure enough there are passages which support the practice. Graven images are taboo, but RC churches are full of them. In the end, God seems to be tolerant, at least since the end of the Old Testament.

[jbg]

So, aren't we committing a grave insult to God by participating in this christmas celebration?

Absoutely not. The weather continues to get colder after te winter solstice, but the returning sun marks the renewal of hope.

Just as the Jews celebrate a minor military victory with the kindling of the Chanukah lights (the holiday was actually moved so it would not be too close to the fall holidays of Rosh Hashonah, Yom Kippur, Sukkoth and Simchas Torah), Christmas similarly anticipates and celebrates the renewal of life and growth.

[jefferiah]

Jefferiah, perhaps you are right, and the post well intentioned. It is just that Christmas has been under attack for so long by secular humanists, that the paganistic arguement appeared/appears to be another attack. The exact date is unknown, the date was chosen to be a counter to popular pagan rituals of the day. As far as God's opinion, I would think that he would look more favorably upon attention than benign neglect.

There are alot of things which I find questionable, especially in the RC version of christianity, but when you question the practice of praying to favority saints, or confession to a priest for example, sure enough there are passages which support the practice. Graven images are taboo, but RC churches are full of them. In the end, God seems to be tolerant, at least since the end of the Old Testament.

Ah I see what you are saying. No, I am quite sure Betsy is a Christian, and that her question was not an attack. There are many Christians who do not celebrate Christmas for the very reason Betsy has outlined. I think many Calvinists (as Calvin himself was) are against Christmas if I am not mistaken. Also there are Christians who are against the figure of Santa Claus.

I think the Christmas tree is believed to be derived from the pagan Ashurah pole....not sure if I spelled that right. Once again though, I think the heart's intent governs the matter. Pagans do not own trees, so therefore, IMHO, it is not heresy.

Do you remember the Seinfeld episode about the holiday George's father invented because he hated Christmas commercialism....Festivus (For the rest of us)? But he had sort of an Ashurah pole too. Anyways, people actually celebrate festivus now.

Anyhow......

Edited August 20, 2007 by jefferiah

[betsy]

Since betsy does not believe in God or Christ, why should she be interested in whether or not it is an insult to something that does not exist. except to deprive others the opportunity to celebrate an event?

Same goes for the evil and bad arguement, what does it matter if there is no evil, or bad, just relevance.

I am a Christian. The topic was meant to be a question to us all Christians, basing it on the Word of God warning us of paganistic rituals. Not too long ago, I was one of the defenders of Christmas - keeping the Merry Christmas greetings alive!

However, it must come with age.....contemplating and discussing about God with my husband quite more these days.

The christmas tree is pagan-based. The fact that the christmas day we celebrate is not really the birthdate of Jesus, but apparently was a day for pagan celebrations in the old days. I'm not sure how Christians came to celebrate it as the birthday of Jesus.

To make it worse, it had become so commercialized....and being materialistic is opposite to Jesus' teachings.

I am wondering if we, as Christians, are unwittingly (although with good intentions on our part) going against God by celebrating christmas.

Like Jefferiah, I am not big on the tree. I think I would just look at December 25 as a day for family, friends and thanksgiving to God. I'd still keep the turkey!

Edited August 20, 2007 by betsy

[betsy]

There are alot of things which I find questionable, especially in the RC version of christianity, but when you question the practice of praying to favority saints, or confession to a priest for example, sure enough there are passages which support the practice. Graven images are taboo, but RC churches are full of them. In the end, God seems to be tolerant, at least since the end of the Old Testament.

I am a Catholic, and you gave a precise example of one I'm also questioning now.

Praying to the saints....or even to the Virgin Mary....may be going against the law of God. Thou shalt not have other gods before me.

Praying to others may be falling under the category of "worship".

Praying before their statues may also be interpreted as praying to idols.

I'm also questioning the different prayers. Jesus had given only one: The Lord's Prayer.

What's your take on this?

As for the anti-religion posters....you are entitled to your own belief. And we Christians are entitled to ours.

This topic is not to indicate that I question the existence of God or Jesus. I question only the various interpretations that exist...since I am aware of Jesus' preaching to us, warning : Beware of those who speak in My name.

Edited August 20, 2007 by betsy

[Rue]

From an academic perspective I believe Christmas is simply a pagan holiday incorporated into the Christian religion along with numerous other pagan rituals that I would argue bastardized the original Christian faith. But then I believe the trinity and many other concepts in today's Christianity were never part of Christ's teaching or philosophy and were deliberately placed in the Bible after his death by manipulative men seeking to control the masses through the use of

organized religious institutions directly contradictory to what Jesus would have preached.

From a socio-econonomic perspective I consider Christmas to be a crass, materialistic, pathetic excuse at getting people to spend money on things they do not need and simply being a tool the capitalist economic system has come to depend on to be able to sell and make profit.

From a religious perspective I think the extreme focus on materialism and not people misses the very point of the Christian religion.

All that said, for millions it is their only opportunity to be with their families. It gives them an opportunity to stop and be with their families.

That said it plays a crucial role not just for Christians but all people who can enjoy that time to be with their families so I think its important from that perspective.

I also think for Christians who really believe in Christmas and Easter and take it seriously and find it of comfort to them spiritually, to me that is their absolute right and I deeply respect that and would never belittle its importance to them and I deeply respect its meaning to them and I enjoy sharing their holiday with them and seeing it make them happy even though I am not Christian.

For those who find Christmas a positive personal experience, I say keep enjoying.

For those of us that for academic or other reasons have different beliefs, so what. I can deeply respect another person's religious traditions but not personally agree with them.

I do draw the line with one thing though. Listen. This cooked ham thing. Look with due respect. Any kind of meat that requires a hair net bothers me. I mean meat should not require a hair net.

Also can we avoid the discussion on Mel Gibson's movie.

The other thing is those @#$@^&! Christmas Carols on the radio especially when its Celine Dion, Wayne Newton or Courtney Love singing Christams carols. Puh leeze. We know all three are sluts.

[Rue]

I am a Catholic, and you gave a precise example of one I'm also questioning now.

Praying to the saints....or even to the Virgin Mary....may be going against the law of God. Thou shalt not have other gods before me.

Praying to others may be falling under the category of "worship".

Praying before their statues may also be interpreted as praying to idols.

I'm also questioning the different prayers. Jesus had given only one: The Lord's Prayer.

What's your take on this?

As for the anti-religion posters....you are entitled to your own belief. And we Christians are entitled to ours.

This topic is not to indicate that I question the existence of God or Jesus. I question only the various interpretations that exist...since I am aware of Jesus' preaching to us, warning : Beware of those who speak in My name.

Betsy I would say this and take it with a grain of salt considering I am a Jew. You and I and many others from a modern perspective know

many things about ALL organized religions may be scientifically absurd or defective or the result of misreprsentations or distortions or deviations from what was actually said. We read. We question. We seek answers to contradictions. Ou instincts tell us rigid dogma may not be sincere.

So yah on one level I hear you loud and clear and applaud your courage to openly question that which you think needs to be questioned and reformed or reconciled with what you truly believe and strongly applaud you for doing that. To question is to exist. It is the very reason I believe we are created-to exercise individual fere will. (that is only my opinion)

On the other hand, I also appreciate you have strong religious beliefs. Why not? The two of course go hand in hand. Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't your religion say in the end it is between you and God/Jesus how you care to apply their teachings?

So I say, just because you question certain traditions or rituals, doesn't mean you still don't respect them or religion, etc.

Its possible to balance the two. That is what you are doing..so I say go for it...question, reform, reconcile, balance.

For me when I get into huge debates with alleged Christians or Jews I say-I have no problem with what Jesus or the prophets may have said-I only have problems with humans who are so confident they know what they said.

Me I criticize Judaism the exact same reason I do Christianity. I believe both the old and new testaments were rewritten from their original versions by men who edited and re-edited them so I do not take them literally, simply as parables.

That is why I say, to me, the Bible is man written. In the end, its what you believe that counts not what some old men wrote down thousands of years ago. In the end how you relate to God/Jesus, etc., is an individual thing you must create and whatever that is, I respect its sanctity because its you its who you are and that is good enough for me.

I make no claims to being a righteous or holy man. I am just an ordinary shmuck. But I do know how you choose to believe, is a highly individual and precious thing and I can't imagine not admiring it in you or anyone else.

So keep creating your own beliefs to deal with any contradictions you feel. Trust yourself to find the right answers.

As for me. I can deal with Mel Gibson. But that movie is just a tad sick for my tastesl.

Edited August 20, 2007 by Rue

[Higgly]

Hasn't Christmas really become a Western family holiday? There are people in Canada who came from countries like India and China who celebrate Christmas. Hell, they even celebrate Christmas in India. In fact, in India, Christmas even has a little cachet, although Indians generally celebrate Diwhali as their big deal.

[cybercoma]

The Mel Gibson movie is an Easter movie, not a Christmas one; Passover not Chanukah.

[Rue]

The Mel Gibson movie is an Easter movie, not a Christmas one; Passover not Chanukah.

Really? That Christian calendar confuses me. Sorry.

[marcinmoka]

QUOTE(betsy @ Aug 20 2007, 12:28 PM) *

I am a Catholic, and you gave a precise example of one I'm also questioning now.

Praying to the saints....or even to the Virgin Mary....may be going against the law of God. Thou shalt not have other gods before me.

Praying to others may be falling under the category of "worship".

Praying before their statues may also be interpreted as praying to idols.

I'm also questioning the different prayers. Jesus had given only one: The Lord's Prayer.

What's your take on this?

Pardon me for prying, but "Catholic" teaching(s) do you subscribe to? This sounds very, very removed from the the traditional stream of Catholicism (which encourages theological analysis) and dwells more in the "literal" reading common to Evangelicals and certain circles of the O.D.

I can deal with Mel Gibson

Good ol' Mel "sugar tits" Gibson. It shows that celebrity power is of benefit when dealing with the legal system. Hell, I thought Snuff Films were illegal.

[betsy]

Pardon me for prying, but "Catholic" teaching(s) do you subscribe to? This sounds very, very removed from the the traditional stream of Catholicism (which encourages theological analysis) and dwells more in the "literal" reading common to Evangelicals and certain circles of the O.D.

Good ol' Mel "sugar tits" Gibson. It shows that celebrity power is of benefit when dealing with the legal system. Hell, I thought Snuff Films were illegal.

I'm supposed to be a Roman Catholic, however I'm afraid I'm a very poor example of one.

Edited August 23, 2007 by betsy