Is Christmas Christian? - Part IX

Continued from Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV,, Part V, Part VI, Part VII, and Part VIII.

Q. 10. But we know that Christians incorporated the use of evergreen trees in their celebrations in imitation of the pagans and their festivals. How do you answer this?

Answer. No, we don't know this. According to the Scriptures, God has made trees in such a way that they are richly symbolic. Woodrow summarizes the biblical data:

Inspired prophets often used the tree as a symbol of that which is good. A man who serves the Lord is "like a tree planted by the rivers of water (Psalm 1:3). The righteous flourish "like a palm tree" and grow "like a cedar in Lebanon" (Psalm 92:12). They are "trees of righteousness" (Isa. 61:3). Wisdom is "a tree of life" (Prov. 3:18). The blessing of long life is likened to a tree (Isa. 65:22). Those who overcome eat of "the tree of life" (Rev. 2:7). God's people are symbolized by an olive tree (Rom. 11:17). These and many more references show how trees can symbolize good things.

Christians, recognizing the beauty and significance of God's handiwork in trees, began to use them as decorations to symbolize the good gifts of God given through his Son to us at Christmas. We don't have to believe the various Christian legends attributing the first Christmas tree to this or that Christian saint. For example, the folktale that Martin Luther was the first to erect a Christmas tree with candles on it finds no support in the historical record.

Even so, the best evidence is that the Christmas tree is a direct descendent of the Paradise tree used in paradise and passion plays in the middle ages. From about the turn of the millennium (1000 AD) these "mystery plays" were put on all across Europe. One of the most popular was the Paradise Play, which was the story of Adam and Eve and the two trees. The play ended with the promise of the coming Savior (Gen. 3:15). These were very simple traveling drama troupes with one prop--a Paradise tree adorned with apples (and sometimes wafers). It symbolized both the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Tree of Life (Christ himself).

But historians are agreed that the practice of erecting and decorating Christmas trees arose in Germany in the early 16th century, at the beginning of the Reformation. The first record we have of a decorated evergreen tree being used for Christmas is in 1521 in Germany. A resident of Strasbourg writes in 1605: "At Christmas they set up fir trees in the parlors at Strasbourg and hang thereon roses cut of many-colored paper, apples, wafers, gold-foil, sweets." Around 1700, Christmas trees were appearing in the new world as German immigrants came to America.

Pastor Richard P. Bucher's conclusions are surely correct:

. . . I think it is abundantly clear that Christians who erect Christmas trees are NOT worshiping them as gods or goddesses, nor are they loving them more than their Savior Jesus Christ. They are simply using the Christmas tree as a fun custom, one that can remind them of Jesus who is the branch of David (Jeremiah 23:5; 33:15), the root of Jesse (Isaiah 11:1). One that can remind them of the tree that led Adam and Eve to sin, but more importantly, the tree on which Christ Jesus died to make atonement for the sins of the whole world (Acts 5:30; Gal. 3:13; 1 Peter 2:24).

If only life were so simple. . .

Covenant Radio Interview Tonight

I'll be interviewed tonight on Covenant Radio. The topic will be is "Christmas Christian"? Most of what I will say, of course, can be found here in the current serial of posts. But if you want to hear about my favorite types of Christmas trees, the coolest Christmas lights, and how great the commercialization of Christmas really is, tune in.

UPDATE: We had to cancel the interview last night. I'll post another entry in a week or so with the new date for the interview.

Oh, here's a picture of our church decorated this year for the Christmas season.


And here's my house:


Ain't Christmas great?

What I Want For Christmas

One of these will be just fine. Body only. I have lenses.



Nikon D3

And check with one another first before you go out and buy one for me. I don't really need two of them.

Is Christmas Christian? - Part VIII

Continued from Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV,, Part V, Part VI, and Part VII.

If you haven't read my last post, stop and read it now. Okay. Next question:

Question # 9. But what about all the pagan symbolism used in Christmas celebrations, especially the Christmas tree?

Answer. The pagan roots of Christmas symbolism is overrated. Unfortunately, during this season Christians regularly get warnings like this:

What could seem more harmless than the beautiful Christmas trees that light our homes during the Christmas season? But do you know why we have trees in our homes? From ancient times trees have played an important role in pagan religion, and were even worshipped. Norsemen, celts, and saxons used trees to ward off witches, evil spirits, and ghosts. In Egypt the palm tree was prominent; in Rome it was the fir. Because of this association, idols were often carefully carved from trees. Jeremiah warned the Old Testament people of God: "Thus saith the Lord, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with hammers, that it move not" (Jer. 10:2-4).

This is ludicrous. Jeremiah condemns gilded, carved images that are erected for idolatrous worship. There is nothing here about using trees to decorate one's home during a holiday. The prophet condemns "carved images" (pesel, 10:14). The "axe" used by the workman (10:3) on the tree refers to an instrument to carve the wood, a chisel. Literally v. 3b says that the tree is "worked by the hands of an engraver with a tool." Using this carving tool the worker makes an idol in the likeness of men and beasts, which is then "clothed with violet and purple" (10:9, 14). They cannot walk or speak and have no power to do good (10:50). Jeremiah 10 is a sarcastic indictment of pagan idolatry along the lines of Psalm 115 and Isaiah 40 and 44. The prophet says absolutely nothing about the modern practice of using cut fir trees to decorate one's home.

Well, then, do we Christians "know why we have trees in our homes"? Is it to worship them? Do they ward off witches, evil spirits, and ghosts during the Christmas holidays? I want to say, "of course not," but I suppose that there may be someone out there who brings an evergreen tree into their home in order to perform such rituals. If so, then that person is using the tree in an idolatrous manner.

But there is a difference between symbolism and idolatry. In the light of Jeremiah 10 and the danger of "carved images," it is instructive to note that God ordained all sorts of carved and embroidered images for the Tabernacle and Temple--even trees!

Around all the walls of the house he carved engraved figures of cherubim and palm trees and open flowers, in the inner and outer rooms (1 Kings 6:29).

Moreover, these carved trees are plated with gold!

He covered the two doors of olivewood with carvings of cherubim, palm trees, and open flowers. He overlaid them with gold and spread gold on the cherubim and on the palm trees (1Kings 6.32).

If any Christian bows down to his Christmas tree, seeks advice from it, attempts to communicate with God or the devil through it, or worships it or God through it as a medium, then that Christian is an idolater. But using a tree for such things is a far cry from the way Christmas trees function in a faithful Christian's home. Christians decorate trees with lights and ornaments because it brings them joy and delight as they commemorate the birth of Jesus. The look at it; they don't bow down to it. They enjoy their Christmas tree; they don't venerate it. If you don't like Christmas trees, then don't buy one. You have a choice. Nobody forces it on you. But don't accuse another believer of idolatry based on the supposed pagan origin and function of Christmas trees.

I'll have a bit more to say about Christmas trees in my next post.

A New Spokeswoman for Blondes

Kellie Picker is smart for a Blonde.

Is Christmas Christian? - Part VII

Continued from Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV,, Part V, and Part VI.

It's time to move on to the most popular arguments against celebrating Christmas. I've answered objections that arise from some Reformed Presbyterians. But just about everyone that holds Christmas in contempt does so because they are convinced that Christmas, Christmas symbols, and ceremonies have pagan roots. Listen, for example, how this blogger opens his post on Christmas:

. . . we do not even know the date of his birth. The date that is celebrated is a date that belongs to a pagan deity. It is and always has been a pagan celebration.

For the next few posts I will try to answer questions that are commonly asked about the history and origin of Christmas.

Question #8. But surely you must admit that the origins of Christmas, especially the symbolism and ceremonies associated with it, are rooted in Paganism. How do you answer this?

Answer. This is a very popular opinion. Consider Rick Meisel's confident claim in Tis the Season for Pagan Worship:

What many in Christendom have been celebrating—Christmas—is a thoroughly pagan holiday—in its origin, in its trappings, and in all its traditions.

The modern conservative cry to put Christ back into Christmas is absurd. Jesus Christ was never in Christmas.

Stop and take a breath. Okay, let's review what we know about the origin of the annual celebration of Christmas.

First, we have reliable records from the middle of the fourth century indicating that Christians celebrated Christmas in the churches of Rome. The earliest record of Christ's birth being celebrated on December 25th is A.D. 354 in a work called Chronography. The Chronography documented the various seasons and festivals of the churches in Rome, most of them commemorating the death of Martyrs. By A.D. 398 Christ's birth was being celebrated on December 6th all across the empire—except in Armenia (January 6th).

Second, the story of how December 25th was chosen has been caricatured for many years. Nevertheless, early church pastors and theologians were not stupid. The Christian leaders who gave us the great Trinitarian and Christological creeds of the fourth and fifth century were not so theologically naïve as to simply import a pagan feast into the church wholesale in order to pacify some recently baptized and nominally Christian pagans. This is absurd.

On the contrary, the facts suggest it was the pagan Roman emperor Aurelian in A.D. 274 who introduced the pagan feast of the "invincible Sun" (sol invictus) in order to counteract the influence of the growing Christian population and their celebration of the birth of Jesus during this time of the year. Pagans were imitating and aping Christians, not visa versa. If you want to learn more about this, read William J. Tighe's excellent article Calculating Christmas: The Story Behind December 25. His summary is worth quoting:

Thus, December 25th as the date of the Christ's birth appears to owe nothing whatsoever to pagan influences upon the practice of the Church during or after Constantine's time. It is wholly unlikely to have been the actual date of Christ's birth, but it arose entirely from the efforts of early Latin Christians to determine the historical date of Christ's death.

And the pagan feast which the Emperor Aurelian instituted on that date in the year 274 was not only an effort to use the winter solstice to make a political statement, but also almost certainly an attempt to give a pagan significance to a date already of importance to Roman Christians. The Christians, in turn, could at a later date re-appropriate the pagan "Birth of the Unconquered Sun" to refer, on the occasion of the birth of Christ, to the rising of the "Sun of Salvation" or the "Sun of Justice."

Third, there is sufficient historical evidence that the church's choice of December 25 as the festival of Christ's nativity was reached by independent calendrical calculation on the part of Christian scholars and pastors. It was chosen for symbolic and chronological purposes as believing scholars reflected on the symbolism of the seasons and the chronological information available to them.

They believed that God initiated the new creation on the same day in which the old creation was made and redeemed the world on the same day as well (Spring). The new creation began with the incarnation of the Word at the annunciation (March 25). Add nine months to this and you get December 25th.

Whatever you think about this line of reasoning, it is anything but pagan! The church deliberately chose December 25th because 1) they believed that Jesus was born sometime in the winter, and 2) having Christmas around the time of the winter solstice would enable the church to highlight the themes of darkness and light so prominent in the Gospel records.  Here is another good article on Why Christmas is on December 25.

Christians were right to believe that the pagans did not own the seasons. Pagans tried to commandeer them from God and his people. And so in order to reclaim the seasons from the pagans, the church chose December 25th. This would counteract whatever pagan winter festivals were out there that honored various sun gods with the result that people would instead be directed toward "the Sun of righteousness arising with healing in his wings" (Mal. 4:2; Luke 1:78). We have sermons from this time (Augustine's #202, for example) that argue this way.

Now, again, whatever you think of the early church's reasoning, it is distinctively Christian and not in any way a syncretistic incorporation of paganism. The idea that Christians in the fourth and fifth century were so compromised and stupid that they just thought up a way to bring a pagan celebration into the church so as to keep the nominally baptized pagans happy is a vicious lie.

The early church Fathers were not as dumb as we often think. Ponder what has happened since that time. For centuries every year throughout the world the story of Jesus' incarnation and birth has been told. And the old sun gods (Sol, Osiris, Horis, and Mithra) are forgotten. Does anyone think that we are still commemorating these false gods? Give me a break. Even if December 25th was a date that pagans in pre-Christian history worshiped some sun god or other, does it matter one wit? Does it mean that we still worship them? That Christmas is a pagan holiday? The true Sun of Righteousness has vanquished the old, impotent gods.

Secretary of Defense for Mike Huckabee

Whatever you think of Huckabee for Presendent, this AD is pretty cool.

TSA - The Federal Officials You Love to Hate

Is Christmas Christian? - Part VI

Continued from Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, and Part V.

This is the last question to answer in this second level of anti-Christmas rhetoric:

Arguments Based on the Alleged Roman Catholic Character of Christmas

Q. 7. But why do Presbyterians celebrate "holy days" at all? Why should we adopt the Roman Catholic practice of observing holy days?

Answer. We don't and we shouldn't. Reformed and Presbyterian churches do not observe Christmas as a "holy day." Celebrating Christmas is one thing; treating it as a "holy day" is something entirely different—unless by "holy" one simply means set apart or special. But that's not the way the Roman church uses the term. Holy days are known as "holy days of obligation." What this means is "these are the days on which it is required that members of the Catholic faith who have attained the age of reason rest from servile work and attend Holy Mass" (Robert C. Broderick, ed., The Catholic Encyclopedia: Revised and Updated Edition [Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1987], p. 267). According to the Apostolic See, Christmas is one of these holy days.

Failure to attend a mass held on a "holy day" is a mortal sin, given, of course, that there are no extenuating circumstances. If a Catholic transgresses with "full knowledge and free consent" of his will the result is the loss of sanctifying grace, the loss of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, remorse, and the punitive effect of eternal separation from God. If the Catholic wishes to avoid these consequences after a mortal sin is committed, he or she must make use of the Sacrament of Penance in order to return to the love of God. (I've tried to stick to the language that the RC church uses to describe matters like this. See the Code of Canon Law, Canons 1244-1253, and the new Catechism, para. 2180-2183).

This is not our understanding or practice. This is why it is so ridiculous when some of our more radical Presbyterian brothers accuse those of us who celebrate Christmas of keeping "holy days." There's nothing meritorious about attending a Christmas Eve vespers service. Neither is it a sin to fail to attend. For Presbyterians, Christmas services, unless they fall on the Lord's Day, are entirely optional. We believe it is beneficial for people to gather to celebrate and remember our Lord's birth, but it's certainly not mandatory.

Furthermore, not only do individual Christians have liberty in this matter, but we believe particular churches also have freedom to observe or not observe Christmas. I think churches that don't observe Advent and Christmas and don't follow a simplified church year calendar are missing out on a wonderful opportunity to instruct their people in the life of Christ. But I don't believe that they are in violation of any commandment or obligation from God. God has given us freedom in these matters.

Moreover, quoting Galatians 4:9-11 is beside the point. The author of Is Christmas Christian? gets it all wrong:

Paul wrote to the Galatians in dismay, "Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years! I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain" (Gal. 4:10-11). He wasn't condemning them for observing those institutions commanded by God, but for observing those of man's making, contrary to God's law.

Paul most certainly was condemning the Galatian Christians for observing institutions commanded by God! The "days, months, and years" refer to the Jewish festival calendar consisting of weekly, monthly, and annual feasts commanded by Yahweh (Lev. 23). But these festivals have been made obsolete with the coming of Christ. The Christians of Galatia were being seduced by erring Christian Missionaries from Jerusalem who taught them that faith in Jesus Christ was not sufficient to be justified before God. Only observing the distinctives of the Torah (circumcision, Sabbaths, feasts days, food laws, etc.) would guarantee their justification.

The problem was not that the Galatians were observing their own special festival days (like Christmas and Easter) not commanded by God, but that they were acting as if the old law was still in force and that Jesus had not yet come to fulfill it. Paul's words must not be taken out of context and made into some sort of abstract prohibition against all extra-biblical celebrations.