Why I Think Christmas is Not Biblical (Please read OP before posting).

[prodromos]

The conversion of pagans in northern Europe and Great Britain and the transference of their holidays into Christianity is something I know about to some degree

If that is true then I'm sure you will be able to provide some evidence of such. Most of what gets put forward though, originates in the false methodology of Alexander Hislop.

 

[The Liturgist]

Are you taking issue with the dates?

No, what I’m saying is that the date for Christmas, for the Feast of the Nativity, was not based on any Pagan celebration like Sol Invictus.

Rather, the fourth century church, which at the time was evangelizing but was primarily in a struggle against Arianism, which is the heresy that in modern times is mainly associated with the Jehovah’s Witnesses and other cults, that denies the divinity of Christ our Lord, decided, in most places, to separate out the feast of the Nativity from the feast of the Baptism of Christ. Concordant with that, the dating of the Feast of the Nativity, which in English speaking countries we call Christmas, from Christ + mass, mass being the historic English language word for the Eucharist*, was determined simply by taking the date of the pre-existing liturgy of the Annunciation, which had since earliest years of the Christian church been celebrated on March 25th, since this was also believed to be the date of Pascha in 33 AD (and indeed some churches, particularly in Asia Minor, would celebrate Pascha, the feast of the Resurrection, on either March 25th, or on the 14th of Nissan when the two differed, until changes in the reckoning of the Jewish calendar undermined trust in the practice and resulted in the adoption of the Paschalion at the Council of Nicaea, which sets Pascha on the first Sunday following the vernal Equinox and the 25th of March) and adding nine months, which took us directly to December 25th.

Thus the idea that December 25h was selected in order to thwart the Pagan festival of Sol Invictus (assuming it was celebrated on December 25th) or the Saturnalia is demonstrably false. Rather, the dating is based on the date of the Annunciation, which the early church believed happened on the same date as the Pascha where our Lord was resurrected, and adding nine months to this day, the Feast of the Resurrection, which in Germany and England is usually called Easter, except by the Orthodox Christians, who more frequently call it Pascha or the Feast of the Resurrection, but not because of any Pagan connections, but which elsewhere is normally called Pascha or a local variation of that word such as the Dutch and Flemish word “Pasen”**.

By the way, as many of you are aware, the Feast of the Resurrection can still happen on March 25th, except in Orthodox churches that have adopted the “Revised Julian Calendar” (in which the Julian calendar is used to calculate Pascha but the Gregorian calendar is used for fixed feasts). In those Eastern Orthodox churches on the old Julian Calendar and on the Gregorian Calendar, when the Feast of the Resurrection happens on March 25th it is celebrated together with the Annunciation on the particularly happy and glorious feast known as a Kyriopascha (“Lord’s Pascha”), this last happened on 1991, when the Soviet Union broke up, on the Julian Calendar, and will next happen in the 2070s, but on the Gregorian calendar there will be a Kyriopascha in 2034 which will presumably be celebrated by the Finnish Orthodox and some of the Estonian Orthodox, who have adopted the Gregorian calendar, and perhaps also by the Armenians, Assyrians (of the Church of the East) and Indian Orthodox who are on the Gregorian calendar.
*What we call a mass, and since the Reformation is variously called a Mass, a Holy Communion service, the Lord’s Supper, the Eucharist, the Great Thanksgiving as a translation of Eucharist, the Divine Service in Lutheran churches, or in Orthodox churches the Divine Liturgy, is known elsewhere in Christendom as the Divine Liturgy (translated) in Greek and Coptic, as the Holy Sacrifice (Qurbono Qadisho) in West Syriac churches, such as the Syriac Orthodox, and also in Armenian churches (Soorp Badarak or Patarag) and as the Raza (Mystery) in East Syriac churches such as the Assyrian Church of the East and the Ancient Church of the East, and as the Qidase “Sanctification” in the Ethiopian Orthodox church.

The word mass itself is perfectly inoffensive and the idea that the mass is somehow Pagan is extremely inoffensive, an idea rejected emphatically by Martin Luther, as my dearly beloved Lutheran friends @MarkRohfrietsch @ViaCrucis and @Ain't Zwinglian can confirm, as Luther denied Roman Catholic accusations that Lutherans had abolished the mass, and instead insisted that Lutherans celebrated it with the greatest reverence. He coined the word “Gottesdienst” to refer to the Mass in German, to reflect his interpretation of Sacramental theology. The actual origin of the word Mass is simply from the rather perfunctory conclusion of the traditional Roman Holy Communion service, “Ite, missa est” (“Go, it is the dismissal”), which in its extreme brevity demonstrates the culture of ancient Roman Christianity in contrast with that of the Eastern churches and other liturgical rites, which end with much longer benedictions, indeed I might post a thread on the comparative benedictions at the end of the various traditional Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant liturgies if anyone is interested.

** Since ancient Dutch mythology is shared with that of the Germanic and Nordic tribes, including those who settled in England, the fact that the Dutch do not refer to Pascha as Easter is yet more evidence that contradicts the offensive and scandalizing proposition that the feast of the Resurrection is somehow pagan.

At any rate @Jerry N. I hope that answers your questions.

 

[The Liturgist]

the end of the day there is no biblical practice for Christmas.

Not true - when Christ our True God was born, becoming incarnate of the Blessed Virgin Mary, there was rejoicing among the angels, observed by shepherds, and the incident caused three Zoroastrian clergy from the East (presumably Persia, perhaps Mesopotamia) to bring gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh (which remain in use in the Christian church to this day!). This very happy occasion began to be celebrated by the early church following the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost together with the Baptism of our Lord. We can regard its existence as the result of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, since the entire Christian church celebrated the Incarnation, with no one abstaining from the feast until the 16th century.

But you believe in tradition, and believe that is equally authoritative. But I and a few others can come up with a new tradition tomorrow, and people can think thousands of years from now that it is authoritative.

Respectfully, no, you couldn’t, at least not in the case of the Eastern Orthodox or Oriental Orthodox churches, or other traditional churches that reject the idea of progressive revelation. The only changes that occur to our liturgical calendar are the additions of new saints, for example, when people are tortured or martyred for confessing Christ, we know based on the Gospel promise that He will confess them before the Father, meaning they are numbered among the faithful, and martyrs are clearly venerable based on their appearance in Revelation. Indeed, our book containing the lives of the saints, the Synaxarion, is also known as the Martyrology, particularly in the Western church.

Occasionally some people are glorified for reasons other than what early Celtic Christians called the “Red Martyrdom”, by living a particularly virtuous life and being discovered to be numbered among the members of the Church Triumphant by members of the Church Militant.

But these are mere additions, and the feasts of martyrs, confessors and other saints do not displace or reschedule the feasts of our Lord such as the Nativity, which are the most important feasts throughout the year in Orthodoxy. Indeed the Nativity is the second most important feast after Pascha. So you would not be able to change it.

And if you established a new denomination with its own customs, what good would that do? Christianity is needlessly divided. We should be focused on reunification wherever possible.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Not true - when Christ our True God was born, becoming incarnate of the Blessed Virgin Mary, there was rejoicing among the angels, observed by shepherds, and the incident caused three Zoroastrian clergy from the East (presumably Persia, perhaps Mesopotamia) to bring gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh (which remain in use in the Christian church to this day!). This very happy occasion began to be celebrated by the early church following the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost together with the Baptism of our Lord. We can regard its existence as the result of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, since the entire Christian church celebrated the Incarnation, with no one abstaining from the feast until the 16th century.



Respectfully, no, you couldn’t, at least not in the case of the Eastern Orthodox or Oriental Orthodox churches, or other traditional churches that reject the idea of progressive revelation. The only changes that occur to our liturgical calendar are the additions of new saints, for example, when people are tortured or martyred for confessing Christ, we know based on the Gospel promise that He will confess them before the Father, meaning they are numbered among the faithful, and martyrs are clearly venerable based on their appearance in Revelation. Indeed, our book containing the lives of the saints, the Synaxarion, is also known as the Martyrology, particularly in the Western church.

Occasionally some people are glorified for reasons other than what early Celtic Christians called the “Red Martyrdom”, by living a particularly virtuous life and being discovered to be numbered among the members of the Church Triumphant by members of the Church Militant.

But these are mere additions, and the feasts of martyrs, confessors and other saints do not displace or reschedule the feasts of our Lord such as the Nativity, which are the most important feasts throughout the year in Orthodoxy. Indeed the Nativity is the second most important feast after Pascha. So you would not be able to change it.

And if you established a new denomination with its own customs, what good would that do? Christianity is needlessly divided. We should be focused on reunification wherever possible.

I did not see a Bible verse in your defense.

 

[The Liturgist]

I did not see a Bible verse in your defense.

Firstly, my post was not a defense, but an authoritative statement of fact.

Secondly, I would assume that since the verses I referred to were rather obvious that providing such verses would come across as condescending and patronizing, since everyone here is familiar with the Gospel accounts of the Nativity and the words of our Lord on those who confess Him and the discussions of martyrdom in Acts and Revelation that I referred to.

Concordantly, since your remark was about how you reckoned you could influence tradition, and my response was an authoritative statement concerning the divinely guided Holy Tradition of the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox communities, which is immutable, and which has never undergone a material change pertaining to doctrine or worship, so that our worship today is in all essential characteristics unchanged from how it was in the first millennium, the main difference being more martyrs and also slightly more use of the color blue in the holy icons (and other benefits of material prosperity in the Western countries; conversely the churches in Islamic-occupied areas have in many cases deteriorated, with the notable exceptions of Egypt, the Holy Land and Lebanon), the issue of the actual inclusion of verses that refer to very well known pericopes of Scripture pertaining to the Annunciation, the Nativity, martyrdom and confessors, etc, is a red herring.

 

[prodromos]

The conversion of pagans in northern Europe and Great Britain and the transference of their holidays into Christianity is something I know about to some degree,

What are your sources that you believe support this claim?

 

[David Lamb]

Firstly, my post was not a defense, but an authoritative statement of fact.

I would certainly take issue with your "three Zoroastrian clergy." Are you saying that is an authoritative statement of fact? The bible calls them simply "wise men from the east, without telling us how many there were. It certainly doesn't tell us that they were Zoroastrians, or that they were clergy.

 

[prodromos]

I would certainly take issue with your "three Zoroastrian clergy." Are you saying that is an authoritative statement of fact? The bible calls them simply "wise men from the east, without telling us how many there were. It certainly doesn't tell us that they were Zoroastrians, or that they were clergy.

The Bible doesn't tell us their names either, yet that knowledge has been passed down. You seem to be implying that knowledge passed down can't be relied on as accurate unless it is recorded in Scripture.
The gifts presented to Christ by the wise men have likewise been preserved in the Church, and are among the precious relics held at the Monastery of St Paul on Mt Athos in Greece

 

[David Lamb]

The Bible doesn't tell us their names either, yet that knowledge has been passed down. You seem to be implying that knowledge passed down can't be relied on as accurate unless it is recorded in Scripture.

No it doesn't, and the names Caspar, Melchior and Balshazar Tare never given in scripture, but have been provided by various traditions and legends. What reliable passed-down knowledge are you saying tells us the number and names of the wise men?

 

[prodromos]

What reliable passed-down knowledge are you saying tells us the number and names of the wise men?

The body of Christ, the Church, the Temple of the Holy Spirit, has passed down this knowledge. The same faithfully transmitted the Gospels and the letters of the Apostles as well as the Liturgy and hymns that were established early on. Can you give a more reliable source?

 

[David Lamb]

The body of Christ, the Church, the Temple of the Holy Spirit, has passed down this knowledge. The same faithfully transmitted the Gospels and the letters of the Apostles as well as the Liturgy and hymns that were established early on. Can you give a more reliable source?

Yes, the bible itself. Traditions of men are many and varied.

 

[Jerry N.]

If that is true then I'm sure you will be able to provide some evidence of such. Most of what gets put forward though, originates in the false methodology of Alexander Hislop.

The Pagan Origins of Christmas: Saturnalia, Yule, and Other Pre-Christian Traditions

The origins of Christmas can be traced back to the ancient Roman and Norse civilizations. In fact, 25th December was not even Jesus’ date of birth. The early Christians appropriated what was originally a pagan holiday because it was convenient. Before that, the people of ancient Europe had...

historycooperative.org

 

[prodromos]

Yes, the bible itself. Traditions of men are many and varied.

The books of the Bible are tradition. It did not drop out of the sky with a table of contents.

 

[prodromos]

The Pagan Origins of Christmas: Saturnalia, Yule, and Other Pre-Christian Traditions

The origins of Christmas can be traced back to the ancient Roman and Norse civilizations. In fact, 25th December was not even Jesus’ date of birth. The early Christians appropriated what was originally a pagan holiday because it was convenient. Before that, the people of ancient Europe had...

historycooperative.org

So your source is by anonymous authors with no credentials and gives no citations or references of any historical documents. Is that correct?

 

[Jerry N.]

No, what I’m saying is that the date for Christmas, for the Feast of the Nativity, was not based on any Pagan celebration like Sol Invictus.

Rather, the fourth century church, which at the time was evangelizing but was primarily in a struggle against Arianism, which is the heresy that in modern times is mainly associated with the Jehovah’s Witnesses and other cults, that denies the divinity of Christ our Lord, decided, in most places, to separate out the feast of the Nativity from the feast of the Baptism of Christ. Concordant with that, the dating of the Feast of the Nativity, which in English speaking countries we call Christmas, from Christ + mass, mass being the historic English language word for the Eucharist*, was determined simply by taking the date of the pre-existing liturgy of the Annunciation, which had since earliest years of the Christian church been celebrated on March 25th, since this was also believed to be the date of Pascha in 33 AD (and indeed some churches, particularly in Asia Minor, would celebrate Pascha, the feast of the Resurrection, on either March 25th, or on the 14th of Nissan when the two differed, until changes in the reckoning of the Jewish calendar undermined trust in the practice and resulted in the adoption of the Paschalion at the Council of Nicaea, which sets Pascha on the first Sunday following the vernal Equinox and the 25th of March) and adding nine months, which took us directly to December 25th.

Thus the idea that December 25h was selected in order to thwart the Pagan festival of Sol Invictus (assuming it was celebrated on December 25th) or the Saturnalia is demonstrably false. Rather, the dating is based on the date of the Annunciation, which the early church believed happened on the same date as the Pascha where our Lord was resurrected, and adding nine months to this day, the Feast of the Resurrection, which in Germany and England is usually called Easter, except by the Orthodox Christians, who more frequently call it Pascha or the Feast of the Resurrection, but not because of any Pagan connections, but which elsewhere is normally called Pascha or a local variation of that word such as the Dutch and Flemish word “Pasen”**.

By the way, as many of you are aware, the Feast of the Resurrection can still happen on March 25th, except in Orthodox churches that have adopted the “Revised Julian Calendar” (in which the Julian calendar is used to calculate Pascha but the Gregorian calendar is used for fixed feasts). In those Eastern Orthodox churches on the old Julian Calendar and on the Gregorian Calendar, when the Feast of the Resurrection happens on March 25th it is celebrated together with the Annunciation on the particularly happy and glorious feast known as a Kyriopascha (“Lord’s Pascha”), this last happened on 1991, when the Soviet Union broke up, on the Julian Calendar, and will next happen in the 2070s, but on the Gregorian calendar there will be a Kyriopascha in 2034 which will presumably be celebrated by the Finnish Orthodox and some of the Estonian Orthodox, who have adopted the Gregorian calendar, and perhaps also by the Armenians, Assyrians (of the Church of the East) and Indian Orthodox who are on the Gregorian calendar.
*What we call a mass, and since the Reformation is variously called a Mass, a Holy Communion service, the Lord’s Supper, the Eucharist, the Great Thanksgiving as a translation of Eucharist, the Divine Service in Lutheran churches, or in Orthodox churches the Divine Liturgy, is known elsewhere in Christendom as the Divine Liturgy (translated) in Greek and Coptic, as the Holy Sacrifice (Qurbono Qadisho) in West Syriac churches, such as the Syriac Orthodox, and also in Armenian churches (Soorp Badarak or Patarag) and as the Raza (Mystery) in East Syriac churches such as the Assyrian Church of the East and the Ancient Church of the East, and as the Qidase “Sanctification” in the Ethiopian Orthodox church.

The word mass itself is perfectly inoffensive and the idea that the mass is somehow Pagan is extremely inoffensive, an idea rejected emphatically by Martin Luther, as my dearly beloved Lutheran friends @MarkRohfrietsch @ViaCrucis and @Ain't Zwinglian can confirm, as Luther denied Roman Catholic accusations that Lutherans had abolished the mass, and instead insisted that Lutherans celebrated it with the greatest reverence. He coined the word “Gottesdienst” to refer to the Mass in German, to reflect his interpretation of Sacramental theology. The actual origin of the word Mass is simply from the rather perfunctory conclusion of the traditional Roman Holy Communion service, “Ite, missa est” (“Go, it is the dismissal”), which in its extreme brevity demonstrates the culture of ancient Roman Christianity in contrast with that of the Eastern churches and other liturgical rites, which end with much longer benedictions, indeed I might post a thread on the comparative benedictions at the end of the various traditional Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant liturgies if anyone is interested.

** Since ancient Dutch mythology is shared with that of the Germanic and Nordic tribes, including those who settled in England, the fact that the Dutch do not refer to Pascha as Easter is yet more evidence that contradicts the offensive and scandalizing proposition that the feast of the Resurrection is somehow pagan.

At any rate @Jerry N. I hope that answers your questions.

Thank you for your post. I’m in the European time zone, so I haven’t had a chance to answer until now. You put a lot of work into your response, and it is much appreciated. I learned a lot. My point was that winter solstice was a very good time of the year to celebrate the birth of our Lord because of the natural changes in the seasons. From your post, I must conclude that it was more of a natural process to incorporate elements of the celebration of the season into the celebration of Christmas. Those elements include decorating trees, holly, exchanging gifts, and lighting candles or fires. Jesus was probably born closer to spring when the shepherds were watching their flocks. It is also interesting that Hanukkah is celebrated about this time of the year, which is the festival of lights. I celebrate both Christmas and Hanukkah. The celebration of the Resurrection must be somewhat tied to Passover, and God planned it that way for obvious reasons. Thank you again for your insight.

 

[Jerry N.]

So your source is by anonymous authors with no credentials and gives no citations or references of any historical documents. Is that correct?

My actual sources are from textbooks I studied many years ago about Norse and Saxon mythology. This just seemed like a good summary of what I read. The actual conversions of common people from pagan believes to Christianity took many years. The Church either ignored or accepted that certain practices were not going to go away, so these practices were gradually "Christianized." I'm not saying that these practices are good, but I am saying that they are not a good reason to abandon the celebration of the birth of Christ. We should just put Christ first above all things.

 

[Jerry N.]

I would also like to refer to the works of the Venerable Bede.

Inventing the English Christmas

Professor Anne Lawrence-Mathers Did the Anglo-Saxons have a midwinter festival before the coming of Christianity and Christmas? Most of what is documented comes from the work of the Venerable Bede …

unireadinghistory.com

 

[David Lamb]

The books of the Bible are tradition. It did not drop out of the sky with a table of contents.

I agree with your second sentence but not your first. We read in Acts:

“Then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.” (Ac 17:10-11 NKJV)

They didn't consult traditions, either their own or those of the Jews.

Paul wrote:

“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (2Ti 3:16-17 NKJV)

 

[Jerry N.]

The scriptures are more important than the traditions of man. However, traditions are an important part of daily life. We have birthdays, anniversaries, weddings, funerals, and even celebrations of winning sporting events. How we conduct ourselves during these events is important, but that doesn’t make these traditions wrong. Some traditions enhance our worship of God. I always thought that the changing of the colors of the vestments of priest for different seasons was a nice thing in the Roman Church. There is a tradition in many churches that the pastor or priest greets the congregation at the door when they leave. What is wrong with the traditions of man?

 

[David Lamb]

The scriptures are more important than the traditions of man. However, traditions are an important part of daily life. We have birthdays, anniversaries, weddings, funerals, and even celebrations of winning sporting events. How we conduct ourselves during these events is important, but that doesn’t make these traditions wrong. Some traditions enhance our worship of God. I always thought that the changing of the colors of the vestments of priest for different seasons was a nice thing in the Roman Church. There is a tradition in many churches that the pastor or priest greets the congregation at the door when they leave. What is wrong with the traditions of man?

But I would say that the pastor greeting congregation members at the door when they arrive or leave is rather different to traditions that teach certain things like the supposed names and number of wise men as fact.