ARCHIVE: Will You Be Celebrating Christmas?

[Lucky]

Will you be celebrating Christmas this year?

[Wamba]

Yup... sure will.

[ShadowMaid]

Yes. :)

[Crow]

Of course!

[Sozo]

Why not?

I look for every opportunity to share Christ with those who don't know Him, and what could be better than taking advanatge of the holiday?

[Lighthouse]

What Sozo said. Well, the why not part, anyway.:eek:

[SOTK]

Originally posted by Lucky

Will you be celebrating Christmas this year?

Yep! :thumb:

[cattyfan]

I celebrate the birth (deathand resurrection) of Christ everyday. As for Christmas, proper...absolutely. But I still prefer Easter.

[BillyBob]

What's the matter, Lucky, no friends to buy you presents?

[Lucky]

Originally posted by BillyBob

What's the matter, Lucky, no friends to buy you presents?
I know at least two Christians here won't be celebrating Christmas this year, for religious reasons. I'm just wondering how many more of them there are like that.

[Christine]

I will not be celebrating Christmas this year for religious reasons. This article (http://tgfonline.org/TGF/topical/letter.htm/) explains quite well why I don't celebrate Christmas. :)

[philosophizer]

Yes, I am celebrating Christmas this year because I can and I like to. Not because I am supposed to or not supposed to. Apparently this guy name Jesus died in order to free me. And I like to enjoy that freedom when I can.

[On Fire]

Originally posted by Christine

I will not be celebrating Christmas this year for religious reasons. This article (http://tgfonline.org/TGF/topical/letter.htm/) explains quite well why I don't celebrate Christmas. :)

That was just plain silly.

[Lucky]

Originally posted by philosophizer

Yes, I am celebrating Christmas this year because I can and I like to. Not because I am supposed to or not supposed to. Apparently this guy name Jesus died in order to free me. And I like to enjoy that freedom when I can.
:thumb:

[Granite]

Fake tree and menorah in my apartment. Gifts with my family. My mom's eggnog. Mmmm. Eggnog.

[Granite]

Originally posted by Christine

I will not be celebrating Christmas this year for religious reasons. This article (http://tgfonline.org/TGF/topical/letter.htm/) explains quite well why I don't celebrate Christmas. :)

Stuffy legalistic nonsense. And here I thought I was such a Scrooge. Don't be a downer, Christine, celebrate! Brother. I'm an apostate and I'm going to at least TRY to have a good Christmas season.

[Redfin]

Yes. "Celebrate" is such a broad, general term.

[Christine]

Originally posted by On Fire

That was just plain silly.
OF, you're entitled to your opinion, but don't expect me to believe you based on that one statement. It was the Israelites that were required to keep religious holy days and feasts. As Body members, we are not required to, indeed, we should not partake of religious holidays. To partake of such would be putting ourselves, as believers, under the bondage of leagalism again, which we are freed from.

[Christine]

Originally posted by granite1010

Stuffy legalistic nonsense. And here I thought I was such a Scrooge. Don't be a downer, Christine, celebrate! Brother. I'm an apostate and I'm going to at least TRY to have a good Christmas season.
Granite, you don't even claim to be a Christian, so why am I not surprised you don't understand the reasoning behind my decision?

[Nineveh]

Christine,
I don't see non/celebration today as a "requirment". I am not mandated to observe (or not) special days, but Paul says, "One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. " :)

I'm curious, I read over the list of prohibited days and didn't see birthdays listed. Do you celebrate birthdays and anniversaries?

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by Christine

OF, you're entitled to your opinion, but don't expect me to believe you based on that one statement. It was the Israelites that were required to keep religious holy days and feasts. As Body members, we are not required to, indeed, we should not partake of religious holidays. To partake of such would be putting ourselves, as believers, under the bondage of leagalism again, which we are freed from.
Where did Paul ever write that we should not celebrate? What Paul said was that it didn't matter, and that it played no part in our relationship with God. We can celebrate those days, but we don't have to. That is all he said, and nothing more. Now, if you want to argue that Christ's birthday was not actually on Dec. 25th. And that the date was originally a pagan holiday, then fine. If that's your reason, that's cool with me.

[Granite]

Originally posted by Christine

Granite, you don't even claim to be a Christian, so why am I not surprised you don't understand the reasoning behind my decision?

I understand it and I disagree with it. If this kind of dour, grim, self-righteous holiday snobbery makes you feel better, knock yourself out.

I've known Christians who eschew Christmas and they are, to put it mildly, real miserable this time of year.

[Aimiel]

I agree with Granite.

[Homer Simpson voice]Mmmm, eggnog.[/Homer Simpson voice]

[Granite]

Originally posted by Aimiel

I agree with Granite.

[Homer Simpson voice]Mmmm, eggnog.[/Homer Simpson voice]

:shocked:

[Knight]

Originally posted by Lucky

I know at least two Christians here won't be celebrating Christmas this year, for religious reasons. I'm just wondering how many more of them there are like that. I love Christmas!

It's a blast! Friends, family, Christmas lights, presents under the tree. I hope I get a BB gun this year. I know... I know... I will shoot my eye out with that thing.

All this.... AND getting to share the gospel with others... it's great!

Only hardcore legalists don't celebrate Christmas. So sad for them :(

[Granite]

Originally posted by Knight

I love Christmas!

It's a blast! Friends, family, Christmas lights, presents under the tree. I hope I get a BB gun this year. I know... I know... I will shoot my eye out with that thing.

All this.... AND getting to share the gospel with others... it's great!

Only hardcore legalists don't celebrate Christmas. So sad for them :(

Never thought I'd do this, but...

:thumb:

You know. Except for that whole "sharing the gospel" part.:chuckle:

[Knight]

Originally posted by Christine

I will not be celebrating Christmas this year for religious reasons. This article (http://tgfonline.org/TGF/topical/letter.htm/) explains quite well why I don't celebrate Christmas. :) Christine... don't let the legalists judge you for having a nice holiday with friends and family. You have liberty in Christ! Don't entangle yourself in the bondage of legalism!

Colossians 2:16 So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths,

[erinmarie]

Originally posted by Knight

Christine... don't let the legalists judge you for having a nice holiday with friends and family. You have liberty in Christ! Don't entangle yourself in the bondage of legalism!

Colossians 2:16 So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths,

YAY FOR CHRISTMAS!!!
(by the way my husband LOVES your avatar Knight!! )

[philosophizer]

"A DENTIST?!!"

[Knight]

Originally posted by erinmarie

YAY FOR CHRISTMAS!!!
(by the way my husband LOVES your avatar Knight!! ) And if he were on TOL I would love his avatar! :D

Tell him thanks and Merry Christmas!

[Christine]

Originally posted by Nineveh

Christine,
I don't see non/celebration today as a "requirment". I am not mandated to observe (or not) special days, but Paul says, "One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. "

Nineveh, the Jews were the ones who kept holidays, abstained from certain foods, and did other such things that we consider "leagalistic" when a Body member does today. As a Body member I don't need to put myself under that bondage, I'm freed of it. There are no ceremonies or holidays for the church today. Granted I could keep Christmas, but I'd just be putting myself in the bonds of leagalism again.

Col 2:16-17 "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ."






I'm curious, I read over the list of prohibited days and didn't see birthdays listed. Do you celebrate birthdays and anniversaries?
Did you read the rest of the article or just jump ahead to the list of holidays the author doesn't keep (nor do I)? I don't keep those holidays because they are religious in nature. Birthdays and anniverseries are not religious holidays, but family celibrations, that are often completely void of religious reference.

[philosophizer]

Originally posted by Christine

Nineveh, the Jews were the ones who kept holidays, abstained from certain foods, and did other such things that we consider "leagalistic" when a Body member does today. As a Body member I don't need to put myself under that bondage, I'm freed of it. There are no ceremonies or holidays for the church today. Granted I could keep Christmas, but I'd just be putting myself in the bonds of leagalism again.


Christine,

Wouldn't being "freed of it" mean that one could choose whether or not to celebrate it? If someone doesn't want to celebrate Christmas, I got no problem with that. But once they say that they "aren't supposed to" it just doesn't sound very free anymore.

[Knight]

Originally posted by Christine

Nineveh, the Jews were the ones who kept holidays, abstained from certain foods, and did other such things that we consider "leagalistic" when a Body member does today. As a Body member I don't need to put myself under that bondage, I'm freed of it. There are no ceremonies or holidays for the church today. Granted I could keep Christmas, but I'd just be putting myself in the bonds of leagalism again.Christine this is exactly what you are doing. You are placing yourself in bondage by thinking that it is forbidden to celebrate holidays. As the article you linked states....Members of the Body of Christ are to live according to Paul's gospel, and are forbidden to participate in religious holy days, ceremonies, symbolisms and rituals.If you made he claim that you didn't celebrate holidays simply because you didn't want to celebrate holidays I would have no problem with that other than I would say you are missing out on some fun and evangelistic opportunities. But since you believe that you are forbidden to participate in holidays I think its rather obvious the bondage you are placing yourself under. Even by the verse you supply!

Col 2:16-17 "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ."If Paul says "let no man judge you in holidays" why on earth would you let some man tell you that holidays are forbidden?

[Knight]

Legalism, Not legalism

Holidays good...

Legalism...
"I celebrate holidays because it is a good work."

NOT legalism...
"I celebrate holidays because they are fun and a good opportunity to fellowship and preach the gospel. Yet I certainly wouldn't have to celebrate holidays if I didn't want to."

Holidays bad...

Legalism...
"I do NOT celebrate holidays because Christians are forbidden to celebrate holidays."

NOT legalism...
"I do NOT celebrate holidays because I choose not to but I certainly could if I wanted to."

[Lighthouse]

Amen, Knight!

[Nineveh]

Originally posted by Christine

Nineveh, the Jews were the ones who kept holidays, abstained from certain foods, and did other such things that we consider "leagalistic" when a Body member does today. As a Body member I don't need to put myself under that bondage, I'm freed of it.

I understand :) As Paul says, " Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind." I am sure you are :)

For me, I am "fully convinced in my mind", it would be more like trading in manditory holy days by Law for no celebration by theological decree. Thats why I left Lutheranism, I had traded the Law for church rules.

For the Jews it was Law. For Christians it's an option :)

There are no ceremonies or holidays for the church today. Granted I could keep Christmas, but I'd just be putting myself in the bonds of leagalism again.

If you see holidays as Law then the way you handle holidays is following along the lines of what Paul says. "He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. ... and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God." :)

Did you read the rest of the article or just jump ahead to the list of holidays the author doesn't keep (nor do I)? I don't keep those holidays because they are religious in nature. Birthdays and anniverseries are not religious holidays, but family celibrations, that are often completely void of religious reference.

I jumped to the list :o :D

Do you basically just regard all days the same, then? Would it be incorrect for you to have a family celebration regarding God? Like a more personal family worship celebration?

[Delmar]

Originally posted by Christine

I don't keep those holidays because they are religious in nature. Birthdays and anniverseries are not religious holidays, but family celibrations, that are often completely void of religious reference. So is it OK to pray before the meal at a family celebration or would that put you in bondage?

[pwbayon]

Holidays I celebrate (not holy days)

4th of July - to honor our nation

Thanksgiving - as a general reminder of God's blessing on this country

I do not celebrate a holy day that makes use of paganism (Easter and X-mas) The hymns of Christ's birth are valid to sing any time of the year just like any other hymn. I do not give a place to any holy day that was set up o replace a pagan holiday.

My only exception is to "help" out at my Uncles church when they have a harvest party on Oct 31. I admit it is replacing paganism but more of a safety issue for kids to have a place to come to instead of wandering the streets at night. Personally I do not need the day nor would my family need the day.

If the Chruch today needs holy days than using the old testement holy days would be the only possible ones to use if a person needs to have holy days. Today we worship in spirit and not at a certain temple site. The legalism of the law has been superceded but grace.

I find the putting of gifts under an Xmas tree to be an actual example of idolatry for this day and age.

[OMEGA]

NO CHRISTMAS FOR ME .

CHRISTMAS is utterly Pagan and God Hates it .

There is absolutely nothing Christian about it.

It takes away from the Truth of the Bible and

does not portray what God requires of us.

TRUE Christians want to OBEY God and not Flaunt this

Pagan Substitute in God's Face.

[Nineveh]

pwbayon,
Instead of celebrating a harvest, have you considered celebrating the reformation?

[Sozo]

Originally posted by pwbayon

I find the putting of gifts under a Xmas tree to be an actual example of idolatry for this day and age. Generally, the gifts are for family members, and not for the tree.

Perhaps, as a small child, you became incensed when the tree did not open the gifts, and you now reject the holiday because of it.



:think:

[Knight]

Originally posted by OMEGA

NO CHRISTMAS FOR ME .

CHRISTMAS is utterly Pagan and God Hates it .Christimas is what you make it. OMEGA you make Christmas out to be a pagan holiday and therefore God hates your version of Christmas.

There is absolutely nothing Christian about it.

It takes away from the Truth of the Bible andAgain... it appears that it is you who has the problem.

does not portray what God requires of us.

TRUE Christians want to OBEY God and not Flaunt this And again we see that those that think Christmas is forbidden attempt to convince the rest of us that skipping Christmas is a "good work". :nono:

[Hilston]

Originally posted by OMEGA

NO CHRISTMAS FOR ME. CHRISTMAS is utterly Pagan and God Hates it. There is absolutely nothing Christian about it. It takes away from the Truth of the Bible and does not portray what God requires of us. TRUE Christians want to OBEY God and not Flaunt this Pagan Substitute in God's Face. Omega, if this is your criterion for whether or not you participate or observe things in our culture, you're going to live a miserable life. The days of the week are pagan. The names of the months are pagan. Many of the words we use are pagan, even words used to translate our English Bibles. How many of the products we use support pagan organizations and companies and people? Paul wasn't bothered by the presence of paganism. He knew meat sacrificed to idols was no big deal.

The reason Paul prohibits the celebration of religious holidays has nothing to do with a fear of paganism or pagan influence, or legalism for that matter (which is the typical protest I get from well-meaning Christians). Rather, it is because the observance of anything religiously ritualistic, ceremonial, or symbolic upsets the created order.

The Body of Christ has a heavenly hope, that is, above the earth and above the angelic realm. That means religious holydays and ceremonies, which were characteristically and distinctly kingdom-related (Israel and Gentile nations), are not to be observed by members of the Body of Christ. The angelic realm functioned in a mediatory role between the kingdom believers and God. The chasm between earth and heaven was mediated by the angels.

There is no such chasm between the members of the Body of Christ and God. The holy Spirit dwells within each of us and our "temple" (i.e. where we meet with God) is not a function of a physical place or a special time as it was with Israel and the nations.

Since the Body of Christ does not share Israel's earthly hope, there is no need for angelic mediation, which is why there is no angelic ministry today. The Body of Christ sits with Christ upon the Father's throne, above principalities and powers (Eph 1:20 2:6) and is administratively superior to the angels (1Co 6:3 Eph 3:10). For members of the Body of Christ to participate in religious ceremony, ritual, and holydays is tantamount to angel worship, which is forbidden for the Body of Christ (Col 2:8-23).

See the following links for more information: Honoring Paul's Gospel (Shunning Holidays, Rituals, and Symbols) (http://www.tgfonline.org/TGF/bootcamp/pb12hono.htm)
Why We Do Not Celebrate ChristMass (http://www.tgfonline.org/TGF/topical/letter.htm)

[Hilston]

Having now read the rest of this thread, it appears that "legalism" needs to be defined. Do we agree that biblical proscriptions such as "Do not murder" and "Do not blaspheme" are not legalisms?

If so, can we also agree that if it can be demonstrated that the Bible prohibits the observance of religious holidays, that shunning ChristMass is not legalism? Can you at least agree with that hypothetically?

[LightSon]

Originally posted by Christine

OF, you're entitled to your opinion, but don't expect me to believe you based on that one statement. It was the Israelites that were required to keep religious holy days and feasts. As Body members, we are not required to, indeed, we should not partake of religious holidays. To partake of such would be putting ourselves, as believers, under the bondage of leagalism again, which we are freed from.

Time for clear thinking. You are correct that we are not required to partake, but you are wrong to say we "should not partake of religious holidays." The former does not lead logically to the latter. For that you will have to make your case.

Let me offer this verse, in case it hasn't been offered already.

Col. 2:16. "Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day."

So, if you choose not to participate, that is your affair. But if I choose to participate, please do not invoke Paul, since you have no basis to do so.

[Hilston]

LightSon, how do you obey Paul when he says "do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day."? How, in practical terms, do you stop someone from judging (regulating) your behavior concerning these things?

[LightSon]

Originally posted by Hilston

LightSon, how do you obey Paul when he says "do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day."? How, in practical terms, do you stop someone from judging (regulating) your behavior concerning these things?

Is this a trap? You are often laying traps. And when someone asks you a direct question, you tend not to answer directly. I think I've figured out why. Because you are always laying traps, you project onto others and presume they are laying a trap for you.

How do I let anybody "judge" me? It is a matter of giving credence to their discernment. When a brother comes to me in humility and with the Word and is seeking to restore me, I have an obligation to "let them judge me."

But when someone comes to me with a haughty spirit or with a bogus argument, like for example, "hey man, don't celebrate the coming of Messiah, because it violates scripture," then on the authority of Paul I can say "I'm not going to let your judgment stand." Alternately, I might accuse them of being a legalist, a much honored tactic around here.

[Knight]

Jim.... maybe you could comment on the following.... What do you think of the distinction I am making in that choosing not to celebrate holidays is one thing but being told they are forbidden is legalistic.

Legalism, Not legalism

Holidays good...

Legalism...
"I celebrate holidays because it is a good work."

NOT legalism...
"I celebrate holidays because they are fun and a good opportunity to fellowship and preach the gospel. Yet I certainly wouldn't have to celebrate holidays if I didn't want to."

Holidays bad...

Legalism...
"I do NOT celebrate holidays because Christians are forbidden to celebrate holidays."

NOT legalism...
"I do NOT celebrate holidays because I choose not to but I certainly could if I wanted to."

--------------------

And also maybe you could comment on the following I asked of Christine regarding the article she referenced on your website....

If Paul says "let no man judge you in holidays" why on earth should Christine let some man tell her that holidays are forbidden?

Thanks in advance for your time.

[Delmar]

Originally posted by Lucky

Will you be celebrating Christmas this year? You bet! As a matter of fact I celebrate the coming of Christ year round!:thumb:

[OMEGA]

LOVE NOT THE WORLD NOR THE THINGS OF THE WORLD

THE WHOLE WORLD LIES IN WICKEDNESS.

1Jo 2:15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

1Jo 5:19 And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.

Re 2:6 But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

Re 2:15 So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.

:down:

[Sozo]

Originally posted by OMEGA

LOVE NOT THE WORLD NOR THE THINGS OF THE WORLD

THE WHOLE WORLD LIES IN WICKEDNESS.

1Jo 2:15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

1Jo 5:19 And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.

Re 2:6 But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

Re 2:15 So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.

:down: Omega... why are you giving all those verses a :down: ?

What do you have against those verses? Or is it that you just simply hate John?

[Knight]

Originally posted by OMEGA

LOVE NOT THE WORLD NOR THE THINGS OF THE WORLD

THE WHOLE WORLD LIES IN WICKEDNESS.

1Jo 2:15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

1Jo 5:19 And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.

Re 2:6 But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

Re 2:15 So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.

:down: If someone came on here and said they loved Christmas MORE than Jesus you might have a good point. But since that isn't the case.... you don't make a very good point. BZZZZZZZZZZZ try again.

[ebenz47037]

At my house, we celebrate all days with thanks to God. Christmas is just another day. If we want to enjoy it with a nice dinner or presents or pretty lights, who cares? :)

[Lighthouse]

Amen, Nori!:thumb:

[julie21]

If Jim Hilston and his family do not wish to celebrate Christmas for the reasons he states he believes are bonafide, I really do not care, as my family and friends will be celebrating due to the beliefs that we share...that is our celebrating the birth of our Saviour, Jesus Christ.
The Pauline doctrine is as with the rest of the bible God-breathed, but as with all of it is open to varying interpretation by many.
Jim's interpretation is his and ours is ours...the majority view so far is never the 'twain to meet' on this point.
Have a great Christmas...or non-Christmas...whichever is the case for you.

[Frank Ernest]

Celebrating Christmas.

I am thankful for the Risen Savior every day. I celebrate being Christian every day. My Christian friends and neighbors have a wonderful time at Christmas. I enjoy that along with them.

Being a student of scripture and having done the math, I know that Our Lord the Christ was born on the Feast of Tabernacles and not on December 25th. HOWEVER, I follow Paul also who says:

Rom 15:2 Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to edification.
Rom 15:3 For even Christ pleased not himself; but, as it is written, The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me.
Rom 15:4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.
Rom 15:5 Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be likeminded one toward another according to Christ Jesus:
Rom 15:6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Rom 15:7 Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God.

Soooooooo, if my Christian friends and neighbors want to think and believe they are celebrating Jesus' birthday, who am I to argue? Who am I to go grinchy on them? Ain't gonna do it. Gonna share in their joy and faith.

[Knight]

Originally posted by julie21

If Jim Hilston and his family do not wish to celebrate Christmas for the reasons he states he believes are bonafide, I really do not care, I would agree with that statement except for there is one main bone of contention here which is this....

If Jim and Christine and anyone else stated they didn't want to celebrate Christmas because they chose not to that would be one thing, however....

Jim's article which Christine pointed to when explaining why she doesn't celebrate Christmas states..."Members of the Body of Christ are to live according to Paul's gospel, and are forbidden to participate in religious holy days, ceremonies, symbolisms and rituals."I think there is a huge distinction between choosing not to celebrate holidays AND being told holidays are forbidden.

Not to mention it was Paul himself who said...Colossians 2:16 So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths,

[Knight]

Originally posted by Frank Ernest

Celebrating Christmas.

I am thankful for the Risen Savior every day. I celebrate being Christian every day. My Christian friends and neighbors have a wonderful time at Christmas. I enjoy that along with them.

Being a student of scripture and having done the math, I know that Our Lord the Christ was born on the Feast of Tabernacles and not on December 25th. HOWEVER, I follow Paul also who says:

Rom 15:2 Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to edification.
Rom 15:3 For even Christ pleased not himself; but, as it is written, The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me.
Rom 15:4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.
Rom 15:5 Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be likeminded one toward another according to Christ Jesus:
Rom 15:6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Rom 15:7 Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God.

Soooooooo, if my Christian friends and neighbors want to think and believe they are celebrating Jesus' birthday, who am I to argue? Who am I to go grinchy on them? Ain't gonna do it. Gonna share in their joy and faith. Five thumbs up! :up: :up: :up: :up: :up: Great post!

[Mr. 5020]

Will you be celebrating Christmas this year? Yep. I didn't get to last year.

[Hilston]

LightSon writes:
How do I let anybody "judge" me? It is a matter of giving credence to their discernment.The only way to stop someone from judging (krino, distinguishing, regulating, esteeming) you according to religious holidays is to abstain from them. Even if this verse were absent, the context is emphatic.

LightSon writes:
When a brother comes to me in humility and with the Word and is seeking to restore me, I have an obligation to "let them judge me."That's not what Paul is talking about. Paul warns the Colossians to beware of the beguiling philosophy and vain deceit of religious ceremony and ritual, the traditions of men, and the Jewish rites ("rudiments/elements of this order" Col 2:8). Paul says that the members of the Body of Christ are not subject to the angelic authority that governs ceremonial/religious ritual observances, stating emphatically that we are complete in Christ, who is the head over the angelic realm (Col 2:9,10). Christ put off, in behalf of the Body of Christ (not for Israel, who were still under religious ceremony), the angelic authority and declared this openly, demonstrating the triumph of His sacrifice in securing the Body of Christ above principalities and powers, and therefore, above all religious ritual (Col 2:14,15). Christ has freed us from religious rituals, ceremonies and holidays. To do them again is to put ourselves under angels, to dishonor the created order and to enslaves our selves to those very things from which He died to free us.

So when Paul, in the next verses, says, "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ," his point cannot be missed. He is not merely saying "Don't give creedance to anyone's discernment regarding holidays." He is prohibiting their observance entirely. Those who celebrate religious holidays have been beguiled by the philosophy and vain deceit of reliigous ceremony, symbolism and ritualism and have submitted themselves to angels. See the very next verse:

"Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, ..."

Paul says that this is tantamount to denying Christ as Head, the very title that places Him, and by extension, the Body of Christ, above the principalities and powers (angels, see Col 2:9,10). Paul says that celebrating religious holidays amounts to:

"... not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God." (Col 2:19)

Paul then, again, states that these religious observances are those things we are dead to, if we are in Christ:

Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, ..." (Col 2:20).

He then asks, if that is true, if indeed you are dead to these things in Christ, why do them?

"... why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Which all are to perish with the using) after the commandments and doctrines of men? Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh." (Col 2:23).

This is not optional. This is not a matter of preference. This is a glaring and emphatic prohibition.

Consider his similar proscriptions to the Galatians. He refers to their pre-Body days, "when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world (Gal 4:3)" This is the same phrase we see in Colossians: Rudiments of this order, namely, the religious observances of this world. Paul refers to the pre-Body time when they were subject to the angelic realm, "when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods." The angelic realm, although they are not gods by nature, are nonetheless gods by appointment, whether demonic or holy. Paul says elsewhere that there are gods many and lords many, both in heaven and on earth (angels and demons), but for the Body of Christ, there is one God, the Father (1Co 8:4-6 Eph 4:4-6).

In Galatians, Paul continues, this time chiding them for being snuckered back to the things they were delivered from: "But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? (Gal 4:9)" Paul is equating Jewish religious ritual with pagan religious ritual, for there is no difference for a member of the Body of Christ, whether you celebrate Passover, Mithraic communion, or Christmas, these are the "weak and beggarly elements (same word as above: rudiments) ... Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid [for] you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain. (Gal 4:10,11)."

How can it be any more clear? Do not observe religious days, months or times. Do not submit to the rudiments of religious ceremony, symbolism or ritual. The Body of Christ is above these angelically (or demonically) mediated observances and practices.

Someone earlier (or in another thread) mentioned that ChristMass trees are OK because Paul said it was OK to eat meat sacrificed to idols. But Paul was not sanctioning participation in a pagan sacrificial rite. That's a major difference. The Pauline equivalent would be burning a pine tree for heat that was used for ChristMass celebration; that doesn't mean Paul is sanctioning ChristMass anymore than he was sanctioning the observance of pagan sacrificial rites.

[Hilston]

Originally posted by Knight
Jim.... maybe you could comment on the following.... What do you think of the distinction I am making in that choosing not to celebrate holidays is one thing but being told they are forbidden is legalistic.It is only legalistic if it goes beyond what Scripture prescribes (or proscribes, in this case).

Originally posted by Knight
Legalism, Not legalism

Holidays good...

Legalism...
"I celebrate holidays because it is a good work."

NOT legalism...
"I celebrate holidays because they are fun and a good opportunity to fellowship and preach the gospel. Yet I certainly wouldn't have to celebrate holidays if I didn't want to."If you start on the assumption that holidays are good, you've violated Paul's gospel from the onset. Scriptures do not give us the option of celebrating holidays because they are fun and a good opportunity to fellowship and preach the gospel. One could argue that participating in prostitution is fun and a good opportunity to fellowship and preach the gospel (I'm not making that up by the way).

Originally posted by Knight
Holidays bad...

Legalism...
"I do NOT celebrate holidays because Christians are forbidden to celebrate holidays."Again, it's not legalism if it is forbidden by scripture. It isn't anymore legalistic than being or being with a prostitute, even if one's aim to merely enjoy oneself and to evangelize.

Originally posted by Knight
NOT legalism...
"I do NOT celebrate holidays because I choose not to but I certainly could if I wanted to."This is not an option according to the scriptures. It isn't any more an option than being or being with a prostitute, even if one's aim is to merely enjoy oneself and evangelize. It is strictly forbidden to observe religious holidays. To do so dishonors the Word of God, and in particular, Paul's gospel. To observe religious holidays is to submit oneself to angels, which is strictly forbidden for the Body of Christ. It is the same reason why water baptism is forbidden. Religious ceremonies and symbolism invoked the angelic ministry for Israel. For members of the Body of Christ to do this dishonors the heirarchy that God has established between the households (oikonomia, i.e. dispensations).

Originally posted by Knight
And also maybe you could comment on the following I asked of Christine regarding the article she referenced on your website....

If Paul says "let no man judge you in holidays" why on earth should Christine let some man tell her that holidays are forbidden?That's not what the verse means. See my earlier post to LightSon. The entire context shows that this isn't a matter of "giving creedance to someone else's discernment," as your and LightSon's view suggests, but rather of clear and unequivocal prohibition.

Celebrating Christmas, Easter, Passover, Sabbaths, Ramadan, Hanukah, etc. or any religious holiday is violation of Paul's gospel, just as is water baptism, and for the very same reasons.

[LightSon]

Originally posted by Hilston

"... why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Which all are to perish with the using) after the commandments and doctrines of men? Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh." (Col 2:23).

This is not optional. This is not a matter of preference. This is a glaring and emphatic prohibition.

That's fine, except that the key phrase is "subject to ordinances". Choosing to celebrate Christmass is entirely different than being subject to an ordinance.

"to be subject" means to be under its control, or to be forced to undergo or endure something. An ordinance is something required. I am not required to celebrate anything. In the context, an ordinance is something packaged up(by men) as a way to gain favor with God. These are the beggarly elements which we do well to cast off.

You have (unwittingly or maliciously) created a license to enjoy all manner of fleshly pursuits and salved your conscience to do so. You then turn around and attempt to bind my conscience regarding Jesus' birth celebration so that I might not take a moment and worship Christ in my own way.

Repent and give up the AC/DC lifestyle Jim. You've gotten yourself lost, and have given up any moral authority to speak concerning these matters. Until you stop catering to your flesh, your arguments will only serve to muddy the spiritual waters and lead the weak astray. I sense in you the capacity to be a great light, but playing the herald for spiritual wickedness in high places is not commensurate with your role as a child of the King.

[Yorzhik]

Jim, water baptism is only prohibited as a legal requirement. If one is baptised, with no consideration as to whether it will affect their salvation or relationship with God, then baptism is okay.

[Crow]

Romans 14

5One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. 8If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.

[Granite]

"Celebrating Christmas, Easter, Passover, Sabbaths, Ramadan, Hanukah, etc. or any religious holiday is violation of Paul's gospel, just as is water baptism, and for the very same reasons."

...and I would love to be there while you explain to a Muslim how he's violating the gospel of Paul by celebrating Ramadan.:D

I thought Paul warned his followers from senseless bickering. Which goes to show how often this injunction is adhered to.

Christians--taking the Christ out of Christmas since 2004! What a bunch of nuts. You people can't even agree to celebrate the birth of your savior on the day your church has traditionally observed it for centuries. And you expect everyone else to listen to you, get with the program, and accept Jesus. On this subject the legalists on this thread have more in common with Jehovah's Witnesses than mainstream Christianity.

What a zoo.

[Hilston]

Originally posted by LightSon
That's fine, except that the key phrase is "subject to ordinances". Choosing to celebrate Christmass is entirely different than being subject to an ordinance.You have to read the rest of the passage. When Paul raises the issue of being subjected to ordinances, dogmatizesthe, he is referring to religious ceremonial restrictions. The passage covers all aspects of religious ritual and ceremony and symbolism. Paul's point is, since you are dead to those weak and beggarly elements (rudiments), why do you submit to the very kinds of things you've been freed from? Go ahead and leave out verse 20 if you must; the rest of the passage is emphatic, and there's no wiggle room. Those who celebrate religious ritual, ceremony, symbolism and holidays dishonor Christ as Head and rob Israel and the Nations of their special hope and calling.

Originally posted by LightSon
"to be subject" means to be under its control, or to be forced to undergo or endure something.The Greek word dogmatizesthe is a present tense, passive indicative verb. If Paul is chiding them for being under such ordinances, it is because they've allowed themselves to be put under them.

Originally posted by LightSon
An ordinance is something required. I am not required to celebrate anything. In the context, an ordinance is something packaged up (by men) as a way to gain favor with God. These are the beggarly elements which we do well to cast off.Like I said, go ahead and cut verse 20 out of your Bible; you're still stuck with the rest of the passage that prohibits Jewish holidays, pagan religious holidays, and made up religious holidays (such as Christmas and Astarte, i.e. Easter).

Originally posted by LightSon
You have (unwittingly or maliciously) created a license to enjoy all manner of fleshly pursuits and salved your conscience to do so.How so?

Originally posted by LightSon
You then turn around and attempt to bind my conscience regarding Jesus' birth celebration so that I might not take a moment and worship Christ in my own way.That's what Cain tried to do, remember? He thought he would worship in his own way and God rejected him for it. The Bible has harsh words for those who worship God in their own way and try to do what is right in their own eyes. The end thereof is death.

Originally posted by LightSon
Repent and give up the AC/DC lifestyle Jim.Whaaaaaat? What "AC/DC" lifestyle am I living?

Originally posted by LightSon
You've gotten yourself lost, and have given up any moral authority to speak concerning these matters.You have no idea what you're talking about. Have you even read my response in the other thread? I spent quite some time on it. Perhaps you could at least read it and offer your counter arguments. Here's the link:
LightSon's Legalism (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=636530#post636530)

Originally posted by LightSon
Until you stop catering to your flesh, your arguments will only serve to muddy the spiritual waters and lead the weak astray. I sense in you the capacity to be a great light, but playing the herald for spiritual wickedness in high places is not commensurate with your role as a child of the King. Christ commanded His disciples to make a righteous judgment. I urge you to answer the post I linked to above and beware of making unrighteousness judgments. What I find fascinating is that you would have me give up music and activities that are not prohibited in scripture, for unbiblical reasons, based on the opinion of your legalistic pastor or church tenet, yet you turn around and advocate behavior that is unequivocally prohibited in scripture. Go figure. :kookoo:

[Granite]

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/sermons/christmas.html

Always good for a laugh.

[Lucky]

Originally posted by Yorzhik

Jim, water baptism is only prohibited is as a legal requirement. If one is baptised, with no consideration as to whether it will affect their salvation or relationship with God, then baptism is okay.
:up:

[Hilston]

Originally posted by Yorzhik

Jim, water baptism is only prohibited is as a legal requirement. If one is baptised, with no consideration as to whether it will affect their salvation or relationship with God, then baptism is okay. This is incorrect, Yorzhik. It is absolutely and non-negotiably prohibited. Please read my previous posts. Please read this link HERE. (http://www.tgfonline.org/TGF/topical/sevenones.htm)

[Sozo]

Originally posted by granite1010

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/sermons/christmas.html

Always good for a laugh.

:granite:

Always good for nothing.

[Hilston]

Actually, I laughed pretty hard at a lot of the stuff on that site. "Accept Jesus and get a Sony Playstation 2." I almost spit my beer when I saw that.

P.S. I wouldn't recommended it for minors or those of weak constitution.

P.P.S. Go Stillers!!!!

[OMEGA]

THUMBS DOWN ON CHRISTMAS !!

IF GOD HATES IT ,

THEN I HATE IT.

[Yorzhik]

Originally posted by Hilston
This is incorrect, Yorzhik. It is absolutely and non-negotiably prohibited. Please read my previous posts. Please read this link HERE. (http://www.tgfonline.org/TGF/topical/sevenones.htm)
I've read your previous posts, and they especially don't explain. And I've read the link (this is not the first time I've read "the Seven Ones" on tgfonline) and I still don't see exactly where the prohibition is substantiated. Could you be a little more specific? This isn't like murder… getting consenting adults wet is not part of the The Seven Laws of Noah (not that I agree with them, but they make a decent starting framework).

[Hilston]

Yorzhik,

If the Body of Christ is to honor the created order that God has established, and if an essential understanding of that created order informs us that all religious ceremony, ritual, symbol and holidays are contrary to the what God has established, then it follows that Paul would command us to abstain from the weak and beggarly elements/rudiments of Israel, the nations, and the pagans. And that's exactly what we see in his epistles to the Body of Christ. It is thus substantiated, unmistakably. That's what my previous posts explain. If you don't see them as explaining anything, I guess you and I are done. What else can I say, especially if you don't come back with any specific questions?

By the way, it is worse than murder. Murder is a sin against another man and his loved ones. Water baptism is a sin against God directly. Theological sins are much worse.

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by Frank Ernest

Being a student of scripture and having done the math, I know that Our Lord the Christ was born on the Feast of Tabernacles and not on December 25th.
Okay, I have known for quite some time that Dec. 25th is not the actual date of His birth, but I have never realized that the Bible gives evidence as to when the date actually was. Could you please tell me what verses give this information, and when the Feast of the Tabernacles is.

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by Hilston

The only way to stop someone from judging (krino, distinguishing, regulating, esteeming) you according to religious holidays is to abstain from them. Even if this verse were absent, the context is emphatic.
Well, it seems that you can be judged for your unobservance as well. So you just contradicted yourself, Jim.

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by granite1010

get with the program, and accept Jesus.
Take your own advice.

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by Hilston

Water baptism is a sin against God directly. Theological sins are much worse.
To quote someone else:
"I almost spit my beer when I saw that."

[BillyBob]

Originally posted by granite1010

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/sermons/christmas.html

Always good for a laugh.

No Kiddin'!



Should Unsaved People Be Allowed To Celebrate Christmas?


I'm sure all you Godly folks sitting in this church today know how I feel about unsaved people celebrating Christmas. But do you know how God feels about it? Well, I'm just about to tell you. It drives Him into a blood vessel popping, demon stomping rage. Ever wonder why so many folks die horrible, painful deaths in November and December each year? Well, now you know. The Lord kills them. You see, when an unsaved child sits around the tree on Christmas morning – the same tree the baby Jesus played in front of when Mary and Joseph celebrated Christmas -- opening gifts - with each peel of the wrapper that little child is taking a whip to the Lord's back. And it pains Him so! And the Lord doesn't just get angry, my friends! – He gets even!

Because unsaved children don't deserve any gifts, much less gifts that celebrate a Savior their parents have denounced! It's like the little tykes are going to a birthday party they weren't invited to and stealing all of the birthday boy's presents! Now, some of you yellow-bellied New Age Christians who don't go to Landover and are listening to me on your fancy satellite might be thinking, "Oh, but Jesus loves the little children." Well, I have news for you: just because a silly little song says something, don't make it so! Jesus hates children who don't flatter Him and give Him His due. In fact, the Lord gets so jealous when people don’t pay enough attention to Him that He even punishes little children for things their daddies might have done! (Exodus 20:5)

So my friends, if a 4-year-old's parents are unsaved, it is just like that little child himself spit in Jesus' eye. It don't make a lick of difference to the Lord. You doubt me? Did the Lord go around asking little babies if they wanted to "opt out" of the Great Flood? No sir! He just went right ahead and drown them little kids! God knows that sin is in the blood, and the only way to get rid of it, it to snuff out entire bloodlines. He taught us that with the Great Flood, and people still snub their noses and refuse to learn that lesson!


:darwinsm:

[BillyBob]

I didn't know that God has blood vessels. :doh:

[BillyBob]

Hey Lighthouse, who's the dead guy in your avatar?

[Frank Ernest]

:Brandon:
Okay, I have known for quite some time that Dec. 25th is not the actual date of His birth, but I have never realized that the Bible gives evidence as to when the date actually was. Could you please tell me what verses give this information, and when the Feast of the Tabernacles is.

FrankiE:
If you have a Companion Bible, look in Appendix 179, chart II.

Luke:1:5: There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.

Dates corresponding to the course of Abia - June 13-19

Lu:1:8: And it came to pass, that while he executed the priest's office before God in the order of his course,
Lu:1:9: According to the custom of the priest's office, his lot was to burn incense when he went into the temple of the Lord.

Lu:1:13: But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John.

Lu:1:23: And it came to pass, that, as soon as the days of his ministration were accomplished, he departed to his own house.

June 20

Lu:1:24: And after those days his wife Elisabeth conceived, and hid herself five months, saying,
Lu:1:25: Thus hath the Lord dealt with me in the days wherein he looked on me, to take away my reproach among men.

November 24

Lu:1:35: And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
Lu:1:36: And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.

December 25

Lu:1:39: And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda;
Lu:1:40: And entered into the house of Zacharias, and saluted Elisabeth.
Lu:1:41: And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:
Lu:1:42: And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.

Elisabeth is pregnant six months with John the Baptist, Mary has just conceived of the Holy Spirit. December 25.

Add nine months to December 25 and one gets September 29, Feast of Tabernacles.

(Study Daniel 9:24-27 to get the approximate year.)

[Granite]

Originally posted by lighthouse

Take your own advice.

Brandon, case you missed it, this wasn't advice...:rolleyes:

[Granite]

Originally posted by BillyBob

No Kiddin'!





:darwinsm:

:chuckle:

Glad you enjoyed, BB.

[Tovalep]

Last thing I heard in the search for Jesus's birthday came from a special on something like the "Discovery Channel". They were trying to find the star the Magi followed. Somebody hit upon the idea that it might be an astrological phenomenon instead of an astronomical one. Persian astrology showed a super-king of sorts born in the province of Judaea on 17 April -6.

[Granite]

Originally posted by Tovalep

Last thing I heard in the search for Jesus's birthday came from a special on something like the "Discovery Channel". They were trying to find the star the Magi followed. Somebody hit upon the idea that it might be an astrological phenomenon instead of an astronomical one. Persian astrology showed a super-king of sorts born in the province of Judaea on 17 April -6.

A "super king of sorts"? Please cite.

[Hilston]

Lighthouse,

After all I wrote, it amazes me that you are still without a clue. It only proves to me that people of Evan-jelly-cal Christendumb are some of the laziest thinkers to walk the face of this planet. Even granite101, an open gainsayer, can see this. The only thing your brilliant analysis could come with is this?:

Well, it seems that you can be judged for your unobservance as well. So you just contradicted yourself, Jim.

:darwinsm:

And if you have a counterargument to my claim about theological sins, I'd like to hear it. It seems to me that those who aren't bothered by theological prohibitions (such as not water baptizing, not celebrating religious holidays, not submitting to angels) do not place a high value on truth. Proscribing against observing religious holidays was important enough to Paul for him to equate it with severing oneself from his Head, who is Christ. How much more severe could it be stated?

[philosophizer]

How are we free from the Law if we are still under symbolic restrictions?

[Granite]

"Even granite101, an open gainsayer, can see this."

Damning me with faint praise, Mr. Hilston?:D

[Knight]

Originally posted by Hilston
That's not what the verse means. See my earlier post to LightSon. The entire context shows that this isn't a matter of "giving creedance to someone else's discernment," as your and LightSon's view suggests, but rather of clear and unequivocal prohibition. I do not think your argument is a compelling one.

I think you are making a jump in conclusion that just isn't there (unless of course there are people celebrating holidays because they think it is necessary for salvation... then I would agree with you).

[Hilston]

Originally posted by philosophizer

How are we free from the Law if we are still under symbolic restrictions? Are we free from the law prohibiting murder? The answer is yes, and in precisely the same way. We are not slaves to the Law because we have been justified by the blood of Christ. No longer does the Law condemn us. We must still obey, but since we now obey out of the desire to please God and to honor Him, we are no longer slaves to it.

[Knight]

Originally posted by Hilston

Are we free from the law prohibiting murder? The answer is yes, and in precisely the same way. We are not slaves to the Law because we have been justified by the blood of Christ. No longer does the Law condemn us. We must still obey, but since we now obey out of the desire to please God and to honor Him, we are no longer slaves to it. The difference here is that murder is morally wrong under ANY dispensation. Celebrating holidays isn't.

Jim... I apologize in advance... I can't remember if you think people in the Body can lose their salvation. Could you refresh my memory as to what you think?

[Hilston]

Originally posted by Knight
I do not think your argument is a compelling one.Paul says not to observe times and seasons and holidays, and that doing so is the worship of angels, which he forbids. What could be more compelling than that?

Originally posted by Knight
I think you are making a jump in conclusion that just isn't there (unless of course there are people celebrating holidays because they think it is necessary for salvation... then I would agree with you). That's like saying, "If people are participating in prostitution because they think it is necessary for salvation, then should abstain. As long as they see it as an opportunity to have fun and to share the gospel, then it's fine."

This just goes to show that people are so determined to hang on to their warm-and-fuzzy traditions that they'll say anything to justify them, despite explicit prohibitions from scripture. The same reasoning that prohibits water baptism (for those of you who at least agree on that point) governs the prohibition of religious holidays. It's not just because it belongs to Israel, but because it is an honoring of God's word and of the created order.

Paul says if you celebrate religious holidays, you are "not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God." (Col 2:19).

[philosophizer]

Originally posted by Hilston

Are we free from the law prohibiting murder? The answer is yes, and in precisely the same way. We are not slaves to the Law because we have been justified by the blood of Christ. No longer does the Law condemn us.
I see a bit of a difference between murder and having a religious festival. God has never condoned murder. But He did require religious festivals of the Jews.

Murder has always been wrong across the board. It has always been evil in every circumstance. It is evil by the very nature of the deed.

But holidays cannot be comparitively evil because God did require them at one point. God would not have required an evil deed as part of His legislation. So this comparison seems off mark.


We must still obey, but since we now obey out of the desire to please God and to honor Him,
The Jews didn't follow the Law to please God and honor Him? Granted, we no longer need to chase down righteousness in the same way they did. We have it through Christ. And we have the Holy Spirit within us, filling us with His Truth. But I do think the Jews did want to please and honor God.


we are no longer slaves to it.
Amen. Precisely why we are not "forbidden" things that were once commanded.

If something has always been evil, we should have nothing to do with it. In fact we should hate it. But when something has been allowed and even required by God, it cannot be, in and of itself, evil. And that places it within the realm of our freedom of choice.

[Hilston]

Originally posted by Knight
The difference here is that murder is morally wrong under ANY dispensation. Celebrating holidays isn't.So are you saying that we are not free from interdispensational laws, but we are free to disobey dispensational ones?

Originally posted by Knight
Jim... I apologize in advance... I can't remember if you think people in the Body can lose their salvation. Could you refresh my memory as to what you think? Since salvation is secured by the blood of Christ only, not by works, not by faith, not by merit of any kind, the salvation of the elect is as sure as the efficacy of His blood. Salvation cannot be lost by the elect of any dispensation.

I know that's more detail than you asked for, but I thought I'd try to be thorough. :D

[Knight]

Originally posted by Hilston

So are you saying that we are not free from interdispensational laws, but we are free to disobey dispensational ones?Of course. You agree right?

Circumsion was a requirement under the dispensation of circumcision yet circumcision "profits you nothing" under the dispensation of uncircumcision.

Since salvation is secured by the blood of Christ only, not by works, not by faith, not by merit of any kind, the salvation of the elect is as sure as the efficacy of His blood. Salvation cannot be lost by the elect of any dispensation.
OK... thanks. :up:

[Knight]

Originally posted by Hilston

Paul says not to observe times and seasons and holidays, and that doing so is the worship of angels, which he forbids. What could be more compelling than that?Again... if people are observing religious holidays because they think its necessary for salvation I think your argument applies.

Otherwise... your argument is in error.

You continue...That's like saying, "If people are participating in prostitution because they think it is necessary for salvation, then should abstain. As long as they see it as an opportunity to have fun and to share the gospel, then it's fine."Again Jim... prostitution is wrong under any dispensation. Prostitution wasn't a work of the law so your comparison falls flat.

[Hilston]

Originally posted by philosophizer
I see a bit of a difference between murder and having a religious festival. God has never condoned murder. But He did require religious festivals of the Jews.We have a different view of God's Law and His assessment of righteousness. Breaking the Sabbath was a capital crime. It was worse than murder. Sabbath keeping was ceremonial only. It wasn't inherently righteous or inherently evil, but observing the ceremonies, symbols and rituals of the Sabbath was required by God. It wasn't optional or a matter of preference.

Originally posted by philosophizer
Murder has always been wrong across the board. It has always been evil in every circumstance. It is evil by the very nature of the deed.All disobedience of God is evil. Disobedience of things that are dispensationally specific are more evil and more offensive to God than things that are "wrong across the board."

Originally posted by philosophizer
But holidays cannot be comparitively evil because God did require them at one point. God would not have required an evil deed as part of His legislation. So this comparison seems off mark.It's not off the mark based on the reasons given by people for celebrating RamaHanuKwanzMass. "It's fun. It's an opportunity to share the gospel." Paul says don't do it. If you do, you are separating yourself from Christ.

Originally posted by philosophizer
The Jews didn't follow the Law to please God and honor Him?Elect Jews did. Who said otherwise?

Originally posted by philosophizer
Granted, we no longer need to chase down righteousness in the same way they did. We have it through Christ.They had it through Christ, too. The regenerated Jew had the righteousness of Messiah. That is what Romans 4 says regarding Abraham. God gave him faith, and that faith testified of Abraham's righteous standing before God (i.e., he had the righteousness of Messiah).

Originally posted by philosophizer
And we have the Holy Spirit within us, filling us with His Truth. But I do think the Jews did want to please and honor God.I agree. So the point is, the elect of the Nations, the elect of Israel and the members of the Body of Christ all obey out of a desire to please and honor God. All three dispensations had specific laws they were instructed to obey. Prior to regeneration, one would be a slave to those specific laws. Post-regeneration, one becomes free from that slavery and obeys out of desire and faith.

Originally posted by philosophizer
Amen. Precisely why we are not "forbidden" things that were once commanded.The logic doesn't follow. We are forbidden all kinds of things, regardless of whether or not we're free from the law. Paul says his gospel will judge all men of this age (Ro 2:16), just as Noah's gospel judged all men of his age, and Moses' gospel judged all men of his age.

Originally posted by philosophizer
If something has always been evil, we should have nothing to do with it. In fact we should hate it. But when something has been allowed and even required by God, it cannot be, in and of itself, evil. And that places it within the realm of our freedom of choice. I assure you that Paul hated what the Judaizers were trying to do when they tried to impose Jewish food laws on the members of the Body of Christ at Antioch. So much so, that he got in Peter's face and publically rebuked him. People who teach and practice water baptism, observe religious rituals and symbols, celebrate religious holidays today, and teach their children and friends to do so are modern Judaizers.

[Hilston]

Hilston asked: So are you saying that we are not free from interdispensational laws, but we are free to disobey dispensational ones?

Originally posted by Knight
Of course. You agree right?I'm truly puzzled. Are you joking? Of course we're not free to disobey dispensational laws. Why would God give laws that He doesn't want us to obey? Why would Paul say that observing religious holidays is separating oneself from Christ is God didn't want us to obey? Keeping the Sabbath was a dispensational law. Disobedience was a capital crime.

Originally posted by Knight
Circumsion was a requirement under the dispensation of circumcision yet circumcision "profits you nothing" under the dispensation of uncircumcision.That's true. Not only does it profit you nothing, but it is forbidden as a religious rite. Marriage as a religious rite is forbidden. Communion as a religious rite is forbidden. Celebrating religious holidays is forbidden. They profit you nothing. That is a prohibition. So is the warning that doing such things separates you from Christ.

[jeremiah]

I will be celebrating Christmas, as the birth of Messiah, the Word became flesh. If it was good enough for the angels and the shepherds to celebrate and rejoice, then I figure we can as well.
I am going to make a particular point of saying " Merry Christmas " to people this year. and if they respond or initiate with a "Happy holidays", I am going to ask them politely, which holiday or days, they are referring to?;) Many of them will be caught in a "store policy" quandry.

[Hilston]

Originally posted by jeremiah
I will be celebrating Christmas, as the birth of Messiah, the Word became flesh.Then you will be violating God's Word for the Body of Christ and Paul's gospel judges you. By celebrating a religious holy day, you will be separating yourself from Christ, submitting yourself to the angelic realm, and bring reproach upon the name of Christ, who is above all principalities and powers. Instead of holding out the Word of Life, which is Paul's gospel, you will be robbing a method of worship and faith-expression that belonged Israel and the Nations, and is unbecoming of the Body of Christ, which is seated with Christ above the angels.

Originally posted by jeremiah
If it was good enough for the angels and the shepherds to celebrate and rejoice, then I figure we can as well."Good enough"? It was required! It was mandated! But Jesus isn't going to be re-born on the pagan winter solstice (neither is Mithra or any of the other pagan gods that Christendumb stole the holy day from). So, to follow your logic, you would have to go back in time to do that which was "good enough" for the angels and the shepherds. For you to participate in such "worship" now is idolatry, anti-biblical ceremonialism, ritualism and symbolism, all of which are emphatically prohibited by Paul's gospel.

Originally posted by jeremiah
I am going to make a particular point of saying " Merry Christmas" to people this year. and if they respond or initiate with a "Happy holidays", I am going to ask them politely, which holiday or days, they are referring to?;) Many of them will be caught in a "store policy" quandry. If you were to tell me "Merry Christ-Mass" (and I knew it was you), I might respond with: "No thanks; I don't celebrate things that are prohibited in the Bible."

[Knight]

Originally posted by Hilston
I'm truly puzzled. Are you joking? Of course we're not free to disobey dispensational laws. Why would God give laws that He doesn't want us to obey? Why would Paul say that observing religious holidays is separating oneself from Christ is God didn't want us to obey? Keeping the Sabbath was a dispensational law. Disobedience was a capital crime.I may have misunderstood your question.

You continue....That's true. Not only does it profit you nothing, but it is forbidden as a religious rite. Marriage as a religious rite is forbidden. Communion as a religious rite is forbidden. Celebrating religious holidays is forbidden. They profit you nothing. That is a prohibition. So is the warning that doing such things separates you from Christ. So let me ask you...

If something is "forbidden" such as celebrating Christmas what do you suggest is the consequence of disobeying this command?

Asked another way...
What is the penalty when a Christian celebrates a religious holiday?

[Hilston]

Knight writes:
So let me ask you...

If something is "forbidden" such as celebrating Christmas what do you suggest is the consequence of disobeying this command?

Asked another way...
What is the penalty when a Christian celebrates a religious holiday?For the elect, there is no penalty. He may attempt to salve his conscience by appealing to the fun, the opportunities to share to Christ, etc., but he will never feel quite right about about celebrating religious holidays. He will often feel that he is compromising even though he can't quite put his finger on it. The hypocrisy of the religious holiday will sicken him on certain levels, and when he finally (if ever) reads Paul's epistles correctly, he will repent of his sin, for not holding the Head and for submitting to the angelic realm. He will rejoice when he realizes and embraces the distinctive non-ceremonial, non-ethnic, supra-angelic gospel he has been blessed with.

For those regenerated folks who have read these posts, they will recognize a ring of truth in them. They will check their Bibles and they will be bothered, nagged by the information until they do something about it and align themselves to the teachings of Paul's gospel.

For the non-elect, Paul's gospel will judge him (Ro 2:16) and he will face the consequences of sinning against God in a dispensationally specific way, the worst way of all to sin. He will be confronted with having directly offended God by disobeying and dishonoring the Mystery, the Law of the Body of Christ.

[Knight]

Originally posted by Hilston

For the elect, there is no penalty. He may attempt to salve his conscience by appealing to the fun, the opportunities to share to Christ, etc., but he will never feel quite right about about celebrating religious holidays. He will often feel that he is compromising even though he can't quite put his finger on it. The hypocrisy of the religious holiday will sicken him on certain levels, and when he finally (if ever) reads Paul's epistles correctly, he will repent of his sin, for not holding the Head and for submitting to the angelic realm. He will rejoice when he realizes and embraces the distinctive non-ceremonial, non-ethnic, supra-angelic gospel he has been blessed with. So are you saying that people who do not feel guilty about celebrating holidays are not elect?

For those regenerated folks who have read these posts, they will recognize a ring of truth in them. They will check their Bibles and they will be bothered, nagged by the information until they do something about it and align themselves to the teachings of Paul's gospel.I am not bothered and I am not nagged. What does that say about me?

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by Frank Ernest

:Brandon:
Okay, I have known for quite some time that Dec. 25th is not the actual date of His birth, but I have never realized that the Bible gives evidence as to when the date actually was. Could you please tell me what verses give this information, and when the Feast of the Tabernacles is.

FrankiE:
If you have a Companion Bible, look in Appendix 179, chart II.

Luke:1:5: There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.

Dates corresponding to the course of Abia - June 13-19

Lu:1:8: And it came to pass, that while he executed the priest's office before God in the order of his course,
Lu:1:9: According to the custom of the priest's office, his lot was to burn incense when he went into the temple of the Lord.

Lu:1:13: But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John.

Lu:1:23: And it came to pass, that, as soon as the days of his ministration were accomplished, he departed to his own house.

June 20

Lu:1:24: And after those days his wife Elisabeth conceived, and hid herself five months, saying,
Lu:1:25: Thus hath the Lord dealt with me in the days wherein he looked on me, to take away my reproach among men.

November 24

Lu:1:35: And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
Lu:1:36: And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.

December 25

Lu:1:39: And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda;
Lu:1:40: And entered into the house of Zacharias, and saluted Elisabeth.
Lu:1:41: And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:
Lu:1:42: And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.

Elisabeth is pregnant six months with John the Baptist, Mary has just conceived of the Holy Spirit. December 25.

Add nine months to December 25 and one gets September 29, Feast of Tabernacles.

(Study Daniel 9:24-27 to get the approximate year.)
Thanks, FrankiE. That's a few days after my birthday.:D

So, is the Feast of the Tabernacles, 'Yom Kippur'?

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by granite1010

Brandon, case you missed it, this wasn't advice...:rolleyes:
Yeah, I know it wasn't. But it popped into my head, so I had to go with it.

[Lucky]

Originally posted by Knight

I am not bothered and I am not nagged. What does that say about me?
You are free in Christ and will not be put into the bondage of legalism. Keep up the truthsmackin', Knight. :thumb:

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by Hilston

Lighthouse,

After all I wrote, it amazes me that you are still without a clue. It only proves to me that people of Evan-jelly-cal Christendumb are some of the laziest thinkers to walk the face of this planet. Even granite101, an open gainsayer, can see this. The only thing your brilliant analysis could come with is this?:

Well, it seems that you can be judged for your unobservance as well. So you just contradicted yourself, Jim.

:darwinsm:

And if you have a counterargument to my claim about theological sins, I'd like to hear it. It seems to me that those who aren't bothered by theological prohibitions (such as not water baptizing, not celebrating religious holidays, not submitting to angels) do not place a high value on truth. Proscribing against observing religious holidays was important enough to Paul for him to equate it with severing oneself from his Head, who is Christ. How much more severe could it be stated?
Let's see, I don't think baptism has any bearing on salvation. I don't think observance of holy days has nay bearing on salvation. And I don't know anyone who would disagree with you about submission to angels, except maybe Leo Volont, if he were still here. But the biggest opposition I have to your contention is that Christmas is not a religious holiday. And it hasn't been for a long time.

[Hilston]

Originally posted by Knight
So are you saying that people who do not feel guilty about celebrating holidays are not elect?It's possible. It's also possible that they're self-deluded or in denial.

Originally posted by Knight
I am not bothered and I am not nagged. What does that say about me? It says you're either not elect or you're self-deluded or in denial. I don't think you'll be able to stay that way permanently, if you are elect. It may depend on how much baggage someone has. It will eventually get to you. It may have to simmer a while.

Rome wasn't burnt in a day. :D

[SOTK]

I realize this is a simple way of looking at this issue, but I can't help saying it: I can't picture Christ saying to me on the day I actually get to be with him, "How dare you celebrate the birth of me and you will be punished it for it!" Can anybody honestly picture that? My feeling is that Christ knows my heart. He knows my intentions; good and bad. If Jim is right in his interpretation of scripture regarding this (I'm not convinced he is yet....looking into it), I still can't see Christ rebuking me for "celebrating his birth".

SOTK

[Hilston]

Lighthouse writes:
But the biggest opposition I have to your contention is that Christmas is not a religious holiday. And it hasn't been for a long time.Christ. Mass. Angels. Nativity scenes. Angels. Christ-Mass eve services. Angels. Yule logs. Decorated trees. Angels. Keep Christ in Christ-Mass. Angels. Giving of gifts to mirror the gift of the Son, or gifts to the Son. Angels. Christ-Mass prayers. Angels. I don't know where you live, Lighthouse, but there is very little about Christ-Mass that is NOT religious. The Jingle Bells song is probably the only thing that isn't relgious.

Also, if you want to see how religious it is, try not celebrating it. The zealots come out of the woodwork. Just a couple days ago, my wife took my older son to his music lesson and was in the retail section of the music school with my youngest son, Ethan, who is 6. One of the workers says to Ethan, "You getting ready for Santa Claus, young man?" Ethan doesn't know who Santa Claus is, so he gave a kind of sheepish smile as the man looked at my wife. "We don't celebrate Christmas," my wife said. Can you guess what the man's next question was? Hint: It wasn't "Why? Aren't you a pagan?" No, the question was: "Why? Aren't you Christian?"

The most fascinating thing I've found is how many people I work with will say to me: "You are so lucky that you don't celebrate Christmas!" They can't stand all the commotion, the shopping, the spending, the hassle. I personally love this time of year because it's one of those times where I can really stand out and represent the Gospel in a very visible way. Until you stop celebrating Christ-Mass, you don't realize how pervasive the holiday is in our culture. I haven't been celebrating Christ-Mass since 1987, and it hasn't changed in 17 years. People are deeply offended when I say I don't observe the holiday, and they don't let up. They really want to know why, and when I tell them, they can't run away fast enough.

[Hilston]

SOTK writes:
I realize this is a simple way of looking at this issue, but I can't help saying it: I can't picture Christ saying to me on the day I actually get to be with him, "How dare you celebrate the birth of me and you will be punished it for it!" Can anybody honestly picture that?If you're elect, SOTK, that would not happen. There is no such confrontation with Christ. There is loss of reward for disobedience, but a truly elect person isn't going have his sins thrown in his face when Christ paid for them all.

SOTK writes:
My feeling is that Christ knows my heart. He knows my intentions; good and bad. If Jim is right in his interpretation of scripture regarding this (I'm not convinced he is yet....looking into it), I still can't see Christ rebuking me for "celebrating his birth".Of course. Nor should you. Saul of Tarsus killed Christians out of good intentions. God straightened him out, just as he is straightening us all out, to varying degrees and for varying purposes.

[Yorzhik]

Rom 14:22 Hast thou faith? have [it] to thyself before God. Happy [is] he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.

Hilston, I promise not to celebrate Christmas around you, as you are the weaker brother who I don't want to offended. You have made observing the anniversary of Jesus' birthday a law for yourself, and I wouldn't want to cause you to stumble because of it.

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by Hilston

Christ. Mass. Angels. Nativity scenes. Angels. Christ-Mass eve services. Angels. Yule logs. Decorated trees. Angels. Keep Christ in Christ-Mass. Angels. Giving of gifts to mirror the gift of the Son, or gifts to the Son. Angels. Christ-Mass prayers. Angels. I don't know where you live, Lighthouse, but there is very little about Christ-Mass that is NOT religious. The Jingle Bells song is probably the only thing that isn't relgious.

Also, if you want to see how religious it is, try not celebrating it. The zealots come out of the woodwork. Just a couple days ago, my wife took my older son to his music lesson and was in the retail section of the music school with my youngest son, Ethan, who is 6. One of the workers says to Ethan, "You getting ready for Santa Claus, young man?" Ethan doesn't know who Santa Claus is, so he gave a kind of sheepish smile as the man looked at my wife. "We don't celebrate Christmas," my wife said. Can you guess what the man's next question was? Hint: It wasn't "Why? Aren't you a pagan?" No, the question was: "Why? Aren't you Christian?"

The most fascinating thing I've found is how many people I work with will say to me: "You are so lucky that you don't celebrate Christmas!" They can't stand all the commotion, the shopping, the spending, the hassle. I personally love this time of year because it's one of those times where I can really stand out and represent the Gospel in a very visible way. Until you stop celebrating Christ-Mass, you don't realize how pervasive the holiday is in our culture. I haven't been celebrating Christ-Mass since 1987, and it hasn't changed in 17 years. People are deeply offended when I say I don't observe the holiday, and they don't let up. They really want to know why, and when I tell them, they can't run away fast enough.
When was the last time Christmas was really about Christ? There are people who choose to make it about Christ, but it isn't a religious observance. It isn't to me, even though I make it about Him. And angels have nothing to do with it, except for the story about the angels who came to the shepherds.

However, I have recently considered not celebrating Christmas.

P.S.
Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer isn't religious in nature, either.

And, I don't do anything religious, by the way. I observe no ceremonies or holidays as religious observances.

[Frank Ernest]

:Brandon:
Thanks, FrankiE. That's a few days after my birthday.

FrankiE:
Happy belated Birthday! :jump: :singer: :guitar: :drum: :Party:

:Brandon:
So, is the Feast of the Tabernacles, 'Yom Kippur'?

FrankiE:
Yom Kippur is the Day of Atonement. Comes just before Rosh Hashanah. Tabernacles comes after Rosh Hashanah.

[julie21]

quote:Jim Hilston
"For those regenerated folks who have read these posts, they will recognize a ring of truth in them. They will check their Bibles and they will be bothered, nagged by the information until they do something about it and align themselves to the teachings of Paul's gospel."

Jim,
The part of my Bible which seems to draw me each time when reading over your post, is 1Corinthians 1:10 -18.
I do as Paul says, and follow no one's gospel except that of the risen Christ...and I celebrate His birth each year.
After several days of reading over Paul's doctrines, I truly cannot agree that he states we who are in Christ are "forbidden" to celebrate Christ's birth. We are all 'free' in Christ,as Paul states, and as far as I can determine, no one can put themselves under the old Mosaic legalistic law, as it became defunct with the cross and the risen Christ.

During the year, our church has many outreach programs to try and spread the gospel to the community surrounding us. At Christmas, we and other Churches in the nearby have various Christ -celebrating events that impact on the un-churched. If we were not to celebrate Christmas...that is the Birth of Christ,as opposed to the Santa Claus variety of Christmas, then how would it seem to those who do not know the Lord, yet know that we are Christ's children?
As a fairly recent follower of Christ, as opposed to previously only 'knowing' about Him, I would have found it hypocritical to hear of a Christian who did not celebrate Christmas ( not saying that to offend you, Jim, as I believe you to be a good Christian who has merely interpreted this area of scripture wrongly).

I celebrate each of my children's births because each brought a sense of joy, love, and hope to my life. I celebrate my parent's birthdays, even now that they have long since gone, because without them, I would not be. Without Christ's birth, there would have been no cross and no chance for my redemption.
I celebrate Christ's birth on Christmas Day, for those same reasons mentioned above but to such a heightened degree that no words could ever tell...
Still will keep on reading both the Word and the posts as they come, as the differing viewpoints are very interesting.

[Sozo]

Originally posted by Hilston

People are deeply offended when I say I don't observe the holiday, and they don't let up.

If you ask me, I'd say that this is the real reason why Jim Hilston does not participate in Christmas.

[Granite]

You know, if a self-righteous legalist like Christine or Hilston wants to eschew the holiday, fine. Knock yourself out. The Christians I've known who don't celebrate Christmas are consistently unhappy this time of year, and I see no reason why Hilston, Christine, or any other grim-faced spoilsport won't deep down get anything but masochistic satisfaction out of ignoring the holiday.

Some people just need to feel a little special. Whatever. Even if I was a Christian still, I'd say no one is going to hell for celebrating Christmas; and it's nothing but legalistic self-righteous nonsense to claim that joyfully observing the incarnation is some kind of transgression.

(Just an aside, but have any of you ever MET the families who don't celebrate Christmas? Yeah. A couple of you have. You know the kind of people I'm talking about. The out-there No TV Club kind of parents with the kids they don't let out much. You. Yeah, you! You know who I'm talking about.)

I can think of nothing more sickening, ridiculous, absurd, and absolutely baffling than a self-professed Christian who is stubborn enough, and arrogant enough, to refuse to celebrate Christmas of all days. Ebenezer Scrooge doesn't need to be a businessman. He can just as easily sit on a pew every day and Sunday of the year except the Christmas Eve candlelight service.

Bah humbug, and I love Jesus. :nono:

[Sozo]

Originally posted by granite1010

Even if I was a Christian still, I'd say no one is going to hell for celebrating Christmas

You were once a Christian?

[Granite]

Originally posted by Sozo

You were once a Christian?

Sozo, get bent. I'm tired of your crap.

[Sozo]

Originally posted by granite1010

Sozo, get bent. I'm tired of your crap. :chuckle:

I just wanted to know what you think a Christian is, since you claim to have been one.

[philosophizer]

Hilston,

What about Christmas is ritualistic? Or ceremonial? It's not like there are any prescribed things that must be done in order to celebrate Christmas (well, maybe for catholics). I don't have to go out and slaughter a "clean animal" for Christmas dinner and do something funky with its blood. I don't have to offer grain or light candles. I don't have to put up a "Christmas tree." I don't have to buy presents. There are no rituals. It's not ceremonial. It just a day of observance and celebration. There is no set pattern of necessity to it. And no one has to do it if they don't want to.

If I do absolutely nothing this Saturday, am I sinning because I have kept the Sabbath? If I don't like pork, am I sinning by not eating it?

[Hilston]

Originally posted by Yorzhik
Rom 14:22 Hast thou faith? have [it] to thyself before God. Happy [is] he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.

Hilston, I promise not to celebrate Christmas around you, as you are the weaker brother who I don't want to offended. Yorzhik, read it again. You have it exactly backward. The weaker brothers in the context of Romans were the Jews, those who necessarily observed special days and special food restrictions (sadly, much as modern evangelicals do, albeit NOT of necessity -- unwarrantedly and unbiblically) .

See verse 2: "For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs."

It is the one who must, of dispensational necessity, observe religious ritual, ceremony and symbolism who is the weaker brother. This is why Paul so harshly condemns such things for the Body of Christ. Truly the lesser is blessed of the greater. The Body of Christ is greater than the lesser angelic realm, whom we bless and govern. The angelic realm is greater than the lesser Jewish kingdom, whom they bless and govern.

Paul wrote this at a time when believers from the Kingdom dispensation co-existed with believers of the Body dispensation. He therefore urged them to be kind and respectful to those sensibilities. Since there are no longer any elect Jews of the Kingdom alive today, Romans 14 cannot apply. This is also true of the entire 8th chapter of 1Corinthians.

In verse 3, Paul says, "Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him." He is making the point that the Jewish believer MUST have food restrictions and the Body believer is not to look down upon him for this.

In verse 5, Paul says, "One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." Paul is not saying, "It's up to you, as long as you're fully convinced." No, he is saying that the weaker brother (the one who esteems one day above another) must make his hope and calling sure, that is, be sure he is NOT in the Body of Christ and that his hope is with elect Israel or the Nations.

Paul finishes this chapter with the sternest warning: "And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin." This is hardly saying it's a matter of preference or optional. Damnation is the result of not making one's calling and election sure. Are you called to be a Jew of the Nation of Israel? Are you called to be Gentile a proselyte of the Gate? Or are you called to be a member of the Body of Christ, which sits above the angelically attended ceremonies, rituals, symbolisms, food restrictions and holidays? Hint: The former two are not present options.

Originally posted by Yorzhik
You have made observing the anniversary of Jesus' birthday a law for yourself, and I wouldn't want to cause you to stumble because of it.I have never said that was my motivation for abstaining from Christ-Mass, Yorzhik, and you should be ashamed of yourself for not rightly judging and for egregiously presuming to know my motives. Yorzhik, you're one of the few sharp thinking Open Theists I've encountered and I'm frankly disgusted that you would stoop to this.

[Hilston]

Lighthouse writes:
When was the last time Christmas was really about Christ? There are people who choose to make it about Christ, but it isn't a religious observance.You're missing the point, and contradicting yourself in the process. If you wanted to make the 4th of July into a day about Christ, that would be forbidden, too. Paul isn't limiting these commands to Jewish holydays, but man-made made-up ones as well. All religiously symbolic, ceremonial, ritualist behavior is condemned by Paul.

Lighthouse writes:
[It isn't a religious observance]. It isn't to me, even though I make it about Him.If you "make it about Him," it becomes a religious observance, and you're separating yourself from Christ by doing that, regardless of what holiday you use as a religious observance.

Lighthouse writes:
And angels have nothing to do with it, except for the story about the angels who came to the shepherds.They do indeed have very much to do with, except presently the holy angels are in abeyance. They have no mediatory ministry today as they did with Israel and the nations. So which angels do you think get involved with religious ceremony today, Lighthouse?

Hint: 1Co 11:14,15 " 14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works."

[Granite]

Originally posted by Sozo

:chuckle:

I just wanted to know what you think a Christian is, since you claim to have been one.

We've been there and done that. I'd rather focus on Hilston and the other stuffed shirts who think Christmas is verboten...

[Hilston]

Julie21 writes:
The part of my Bible which seems to draw me each time when reading over your post, is 1Corinthians 1:10 -18.Notice what Paul says in the passage you cite. He urges them to be of the same mind (1Co 1:10), united according to his Gospel (cf. Ro 2:16 16:25 2Ti 2:8), the unity of which is outlined in Eph 4:4-6. He has been informed of contentions between Jew/Gentile and Body saints and is writing to deal with those matters. Paul makes the point that, although he baptized some Jewish believers and Gentile converts (as it was fitting and required for him to do), he emphatically states "... Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: ..." He makes a distinction between HIS gospel (that of the risen Christ), which is non-ritualistic, and that of the earthly Jesus, Who did not separate baptism from the Jewish gospel (Mt. 28:19,20).

Julie21 writes:
After several days of reading over Paul's doctrines, I truly cannot agree that he states we who are in Christ are "forbidden" to celebrate Christ's birth.If that is your conclusion, then will continue to separate yourself from Christ by observing this religious holiday.

Julie21 writes:
We are all 'free' in Christ, as Paul states, ...That doesn't mean you are free to disobey the gospel, which is what you're doing if you celebrate Christ-Mass.

Julie21 writes:
... and as far as I can determine, no one can put themselves under the old Mosaic legalistic law, as it became defunct with the cross and the risen Christ.As I indicated to Lighthouse, you can put yourself under the angelic realm by making anything into a religious ritual. If brushing your teeth became a time of special religious devotion for you, then you've made it into a ritual, putting yourself under the angelic realm and violated Paul's gospel.

By the way, the Mosaic Law was not legalistic, no more and no less than Paul's Law or Noah's Law. Furthermore, it was not "defunct" as the result of the cross and resurrection. Jesus continued to teach the Mosaic law AFTER His resurrection. In fact, He commanded His disciples to observe everything whatsoever He commanded them, included the sacrifices, sin offerings, spice tithes, food restrictions, etc. that He taught throughout His earthly ministry (Mt. 28:19,20 cf. Mt. 23:1-3).

Julie21 writes:
During the year, our church has many outreach programs to try and spread the gospel to the community surrounding us. At Christmas, we and other Churches in the nearby have various Christ -celebrating events that impact on the un-churched. If we were not to celebrate Christmas...that is the Birth of Christ,as opposed to the Santa Claus variety of Christmas, then how would it seem to those who do not know the Lord, yet know that we are Christ's children?You're asking me how would it seem to un-churched people if churched people behave unbiblically? You're asking me to let the Christ-hating world be a reason for celebrating something that the Bible strictly forbids. What's wrong with this picture?

Julie21 writes:
As a fairly recent follower of Christ, as opposed to previously only 'knowing' about Him, I would have found it hypocritical to hear of a Christian who did not celebrate Christmas.I won't let you or the "unchurched" world dictate to me how I should honor God's word. Just because the unsaved world thinks Christians should behave a certain way doesn't mean I should let that determine my behavior. The lie of Christ-Mass was manufactured by apostates to begin with, and for the world to now expect Christians to observe that day has nothing to do with what the Bible teaches.

Julie21 writes:
( not saying that to offend you, Jim, as I believe you to be a good Christian who has merely interpreted this area of scripture wrongly).Show me my error. Show me how you are not severing yourself from your Head by celebrating religious holidays.

Julie21 writes:
I celebrate each of my children's births because each brought a sense of joy, love, and hope to my life. I celebrate my parent's birthdays, even now that they have long since gone, because without them, I would not be.And if you do so as a religious exercise, it is contrary to the gospel and you are separating yourself from Christ.

Julie21 writes:
Without Christ's birth, there would have been no cross and no chance for my redemption. I celebrate Christ's birth on Christmas Day, for those same reasons mentioned above but to such a heightened degree that no words could ever tell ...It's frightening. With Paul, I say "But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid [for] you, ..." (Gal 4:9-11).