Does the Bible Command us to Celebrate Christ's Birth?
Debating with Jehovah's Witnesses why we celebrate Christmas
By Greg
Thornberg
Jehovah Witnesses do not celebrate
Christmas for varied and inconsistent reasons. One argument is that
"Christmas is pagan." The other includes the "fact" that "the
Bible doesn't command followers to observe Christ's birthday." One
Witness publication states
M'Clintock and Strong's
Cyclopedia says: "The observance of Christmas is not of divine
appointment, nor is it of N[ew] T[estament] origin. The day
of Christ's cannot be ascertained from the N[ew] T[estament], or,
indeed, from any other source."
(Reasoning from the Scripture, p. 177)
The logic of
this argument is something along the lines of, "if God doesn't
directly command us to do something, we shouldn't do it." The
problem with this line of reasoning is that the Bible teaches us
many things by way of example. Parables are an excellent
example of this. The parable of the hidden treasure tells us
about a man who found a treasure hidden in a field, who "in his joy
he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field." (Mat. 13:44)
Although the parable doesn't directly command a person to value the
kingdom of heaven to the point of selling all one has, no one would
deny that this is the parable's point.
We believe that
"all scripture
is God breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and
training in righteousness so that the man of God may be thoroughly
equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16) It teaches us both
by direct command and by example. Most Old Testament laws can
be taken in a paradigmatic manner, that is, they are examples of how
to judge without having to create a written law for each and every
possible legal situation. This is how the nation of Israel
managed to judge itself on only 613 laws. If one law talks
about what to do if an Ox that falls in a ditch, what should you do
if a horse falls in the ditch? By inference we know that what's true
about the Ox is going to be true for any other animal that falls
into a ditch.
When Scripture
tells us about shepherds who traveled to the birth scene of Jesus,
and "returned, glorifying and praising God for all they had
heard and seen," (Luke 2:20) was this merely historical narrative or
was there a point to telling us about the response of those who saw
the newborn savior? Shouldn't we also celebrate the birth of our
king? One Witness attempted to argue that the shepherds were common
men and were not godly examples who's behavior we should emulate.
So I ask him about the angels in Luke 2. I pointed out how the
angels reacted
Suddenly a
great company of the heavenly hosts appeared with the angel,
praising God and saying, "Glory to God in the highest, and on
Earth peace to men to whom His favor rests."
(Luke 2:13-14)
What about the example of Simeon who
was "righteous and devout" (Luke
2:25)? Simeon's response is recorded by Luke
Guided by the Spirit,
Simeon came into the temple; and when the parents brought in the
child Jesus, to do for him what was customary under the law,
Simeon took him in his arms and praised God...
(Luke
2:27-28)
So also Anna
the prophetess 2:36-38 celebrates Christ's birth. It is
unconvincing at best to say that the Bible doesn't teach us to
celebrate Christ's birth. It is commonly understand and
accepted by both Witnesses and Christians that one ought to emulate
the behaviors of righteous men and women. So why don't Witnesses
celebrate Christ's birth? There's more theological baggage the
Witness has against Christmas than just this.
Pagan Origins
The most common explanation for not celebrating Christmas is that it
coincides with pagan holidays such as "the dies natalis Solis
Invicti (birthday of the invincible sun)." (so says the Witness
publication Reasoning from the Scripture, p. 177) We
could also add that some Witnesses object to Christmas on the common
belief that Christians did not celebrate his birth until after the
Constantine legalized Christianity in 313 A.D. The argument
goes something like, “The Church didn’t celebrate until after it had
become corrupted by the Roman government.” But it's simply not true
that Christians didn't celebrate Christ's birth prior to 313. Almost
immediately after the first century, Christians began calculating
and celebrating the Lord’s birth. Clement of Alexandria (?-215 A.D.)
stated that “…there are those who have determined not only the year
of our Lord's birth, but also the day; and they say that it took
place in the twenty-eighth year of Augustus, and in the twenty-fifth
day of Pachon.” (Stromati, I, 21) This would place the
birth of Christ around May 20th if it were correct.
We are also told that alternative speculations put the Lord’s birth
on April 19th—Clement additionally comments that “others
say that He was born on the twenty-fourth or twenty-fifth of
Pharmuthi.” (Stromati, I, 21)
Dates mentioned by
Clement had no correlation to popular “pagan holidays”. In
other words, Christians were not influenced by pagan holidays to
seek out a reason to celebrate Christ’s birth. Christians appeared
motivated simply by the historical fact that Christ was born and
that the New Testament writings displayed great jubilation in the
stories of the angels, shepherds and magi. From this perspective,
Christians could not have been motivated by pagan holidays.
When did Christians
begin to celebrate Christ’s birth? The earliest record we have of
Christian’s celebrating Christ’s birth is Telesphorus between 125
and 136 A.D., who calls it “The Nativity of our Lord and Saviour.”
Although some sources state that this is the first time Christians
celebrated his birth, [1] it is poor
logic to say that this was the first time Christians were
celebrating. As with any early writing that describes an event, the
reader should always understand that events they record always
predate the time of their being recorded.
By the fourth
century, aspects of Christmas likely influenced by pagan festivities
included the month December and, possibly, gift giving through the
influence of Saturnalia. Prior to this time, Christians were
already honoring the Nativity story through Church assembly,
teaching and festivities. The choice of the 25th
day for December can not be pinned down as influenced by the winter
solstice events on the 21st, though there are some
arguments to that affect. The 25th day was likely chosen
because prior to the fourth century, almost all speculations of the
Nativity placed his birth on the 25th of each suggested
month (cf. Celment, Stromati, I, 21, etc.). Christians had
historically believed that it was on a 25th day Christ
was born (which they did), pagan festivities such as dies natalis
Solis Invicti (birthday of the invincible sun) were typically on
the 21st. The 25th is more easily
explained as influenced by the historical precedence of the 25th-day
speculations. Prior to the fourth century, the month of
December had not been the precedent for speculations of the birth.
December, then, probably was influenced by contemporary pagan
festivities more than by historical precedence. Christians who were
surrounded by pagan festivities probably sought to celebrate their
Lord and Savior instead. Such motivations could hardly be labeled
"pagan" by any means!
Why did we end up
with December? The possibilities are generally limited to: (1)
The Church was infiltrated by pagan culture, (2) the Church was
overcoming pagan culture or (3) that the reason cannot be known.
Two major factors make the second possibility the most likely.
First, by the end of the fourth century, almost all pagan
celebrations were completely ended throughout the Roman Empire.
Paganism was outlawed and all known temples destroyed by the end of
the fourth century. Secondly, Church fathers of the time seem
to suggest that the motivation of Nativity celebrations was to
replace honoring the “birthday of the invincible sun” to the
birthday of the Son of God. Saint Augustine in the later
fourth century seems to give this reasoning in his “Sermon On the
Nativity” (Sermon 202). Just as the sun began to grow brighter
each day and the night diminish during the 25th, so also,
Augustine teaches
God sent John to earth as His
human Precursor so that he was born when the days were becoming
shorter while the Lord Himself was born when the days were growing
longer, that in this minute detail the subsequent words of this same
John might be prefigured: 'He must increase, but I must decrease.'
For human life ought to grow weaker in itself and stronger in
Christ, that 'they who are alive may live no longer for themselves,
but for him who died for all and rose again,' and that each one of
us may say in the words of the Apostle: 'It is now no longer I that
live, but Christ lives in me.' For 'he must increase, but I must
decrease.'
The parallelism
here is hardly pagan, but rather analogous. First, it was
factual that the sun was growing brighter each day. This is
not pagan teaching, but scientific fact. Second, Augustine was
comparing scientific fact with biblical teaching. He was not
comparing anything to the pagan rituals. It was true that John the
Baptist said, “He must become greater; I must become less.” (John
3:30) Neither teaching is pagan. What we observe in
Augustine is the perfect analogy between two facts—one biblical and
the other scientific. It would be foolish to view this as only
“one possible teaching” within the Christian Church at that time as
Augustine was the most influential Church father in all history.
If the sheer clout of Augustine means anything, it was, in fact,
the teaching of the Church for centuries. Augustine was
also a Church leader in the period when Christ-Mass was established
on December 25th which makes his insights all the more
pertinent. The evidence of "paganism" being the motivation for
Christmas simply isn't compelling.
Calendar Shift
If one is still bothered by the fact that the 25th was
“originally during” the pagan celebrations of the Mithra cult, it
may be heartening to hear that in 1752 the calendar shifted from the
Julian calendar to the Gregorian. This shift moved the
historical Christmas to January 7th instead of December
25th. Recognizing this, the Greek Orthodox Church
still celebrates Christ’s birth on January 7th instead of
the more universal December 25th. The 25th
day we celebrate today is no longer close the historical pagan day
of celebration.
Giving Satan too
much Credit
Should we
really think that images and days have real evil power? Or
should we believe that God alone has power and that an image is
nothing? To worry about which day one celebrates Christmas
gives Satan too much credit. If you are reading this with some
residual doubt, may I be so bold as to ask you, who do you think is
the Lord of this world? From whom does this world come? God is the
source of every created thing, whether it be animals, objects or
days. Wouldn't December 25th also belong to God? What can we
infer from Paul who, when he writes to the Corinthians about their
fear of food offered to idols, says
So then,
about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is
nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one.
For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on
earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"), yet for
us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and
for whom we live...
(1 Cor. 8:4-6)
When it says,
"from whom all things came" does that not include shapes and trees
and days and seasons. If the pagans use these things to
their own honor do they really have the power to take what is God's
and make it their own? Or do we wish to give them power to
control what is God's? Our position (the position of Evangelical
Christians) is that we refuse to give pagans the power to take what
is God's and pervert it. If you give Satan that kind of credit, then
you minimize the sovereign right God has to all created things. We
also will not let God's trees and shapes and seasons and days be
made something evil. Paul is on our side. Paul concludes about
about those who eat food offered to an idol, "we are no worse if we
do not eat, and no better if we do." (vs. 8) Why is this? Because
all things come from our Lord and Creator!
If it is a valid
principle to avoid associations with things pagans use we must be
willing to go all the way. Consider this:
Rainbows are
now commonly used as new age and homosexual symbols. Does that
mean we should avoid all rainbows for fear of their association?
Fire and candles are symbolic to many pagans. Murderers drive cars
and own clothes. Should we stop driving and wearing clothes?
Of course not. But Jehovah's Witnesses use exactly this kind
of reasoning when it comes to Christmas but not when it comes to the
rest of their lives. It's simply an invalid principle that no
one can live by.
An Inconvenient
Truth
The very name
theos, from the Greek,
what we call God, is originally from a pagan culture. It comes
from Greeks and Greek mythology. The Greeks called their Gods
"theoi" (which is many Gods) and "theos" (God) well before
Christians used the name to describe our God. I hope my point is
becoming clear by now. It is absolutely incorrect to say "we can't
associate with [Christmas] because it has 'pagen origins' and
symbols." If we are supposed to avoid everything pagans have either
invented or used, then we'd have to give up just about
everything. If pagans started using the Bible in religious
ceremonies (and some do!), does that make the Bible unholy?
Wickedness doesn't come from objects or things. Jesus was very
clear that it is what a man has in his heart that will make him
clean or unclean (Matt. 12:35; 15:18-19). So to those of you who
object to Christmas because it is "pagan" I would suggest that you
get over it.
Other Common
Objections I have Heard
Mark 7:6-9
He [Jesus] replied, "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you
hypocrites; as it is written: These people honor me with their
lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain;
their teachings are but rules taught by men. You have let go of
the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men."
And he said to them: "You have a fine way of setting aside the
commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!"
The objection is
that Christmas as we know it today is a "human tradition."
This verse
doesn't apply to Christmas because the problem wasn't "rules taught
by men" but that the Jews "have let go of the commands of God"
and replacing it with "the traditions of men." We must be very
precise at this point, it is the act of turning away from the
commandments of God to anything that is the sin. Having money
is not a sin, but if our act is to "let go of the commands of God"
and turn to money we are sinning. This verse doesn't prove
that rules taught by men are wrong, but the act of letting go of the
commands of God. Is it wrong to teach the rules of driving, or
the rules of backgammon? No. Why not? These are definitely
"rules taught by men." There are people who end up taking it to such
an extreme, but in the end their silliness catches up.
Mathew 15:7-9
You hypocrites! Isaiah prophesied
rightly about you when he said: 'This people honors me with their
lips, but their hearts are far from me; in vain do they worship me,
teaching human precepts as doctrines.'
Again, you must
focus on the main point of this verse. The sin was "teaching
as doctrines the precepts of men." During Christmas we do not
teach "as doctrines" that Christ had a Christmas tree and that Mary,
Joseph and Jesus sat around the Balsam Fir and said, "Ok now it's
little Jesus' turn to open his present. Oh look, it's a box of
frankincense!" Instead we teach correctly that Jesus was born to be
the Savior of man, the lamb of God, God with us, and that angels
appeared to shepherds in the fields and that, like we today, those
who witnessed his arrival
celebrated. It
is not the "doctrine of man" but the doctrines of God that
teach us how people celebrated Christ's birth! It's written in black
and white and from old with ink on parchment throughout the opening
of the Gospel of Luke. Just in case someone may say, "Yes, but you
Christians teach that Christ was born December 25th," I know of few
people who haven't been correctly taught that we don't really know
the day of his birth. There is also a difference between
"teaching doctrines" and choosing a day to celebrate an event.
In other words, a verse about "teaching as doctrines the precepts of
men" does not apply to a discussion of "Can people make December
25th a holy day for Christ's birthday?"
An Actual Question we were Asked
Would you
choose to have an upside-down pentagram in your house?
The point of
the question was basically that if the Christmas tree has pagan
origins, why not allow "upside-down
pentagram in your house?"
The question is almost unfair. If I answer, "no," the Witness
is going to assume that my reasoning is on the basis of morality.
The truth is that if it could be used to glorify God, I would use
it. But my ultimate answer comes from a separate principle
which states, "Be careful, however, that the exercise of your
freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak." (1 Cor.
8:10). When it comes to conscience, there are two kinds of
believers: One of a strong conscience and the other of a weak
conscience. The man of stronger conscience must
sometimes restrain his freedoms out of love for the weaker believer
who has not yet fully come to understand the freedoms he has in
Christ. The man of a strong conscience understands the
freedoms in Christ. The man of the weak conscience does not. Some in
Corinth understood their freedom. Paul likewise understood their
freedoms when he wrote
'Everything is permissible'--but not everything is beneficial.
(1 Cor. 10:23)
And again
The earth
is the Lord's, and everything in it.
(1 Cor. 10:26)
The passage
is set within the context of people who ate foods in the open market
of Corinth. Wherever one went to buy meat, a portion of that
meat inevitably was offered to an idol. Should a person avoid
eating this meat because of its association with pagan idols?
No. Paul says that the believer should eat anything offered in the
market without raising questions of conscience (v. 25). His
reason is simply this, "The earth is the Lord's, and everything in
it." (v. 26)
But beyond
having our freedoms, Paul gives us this higher calling, "Nobody
should seek his own good, but the good of others." (1 Cor. 10:24)
He goes on to explain how if anyone invites you to a meal, "eat
whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience."
(v. 27) However, Paul warns
But if anyone says to you, 'This is
meat sacrificed to idols,' do not eat for the sake of the one who
informed and for conscience' sake; I mean not your own conscience,
but the other...
(v. 28-29)
This is not
for our own conscience but for the other person's conscience.
Paul even asks, "for why is my freedom judged by another's
conscience?" (v. 29) Paul does not command us to abandon our
freedoms but rather, as he says
Give no
offense either to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God; just as
I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit but
the of the many, so that they may be saved.
(vs. 32-33)
We may
practice our freedoms, but not in front of those to whom it would be
an offense. In my earlier response I quoted chapter 8.
One verse I didn't quote was where Paul reminded the Corinthians
Be
careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become
a stumbling block to the weak.
(1 Cor. 8:10)
So what is
the principle? Practice your freedoms, but be careful not to let
your freedoms cause others to stumble. In other words, if a
weaker believer ever wanted to visit my home, I would gladly remove
my Christmas tree and pentagram clock so as not to offend them.
If you wish
to give Satan so much power that he can control what is made by God
and if you wish that God is so powerless that he cannot make
something once used in a pagan context holy again, you will live a
life without freedom.
I close with this
very well written quote I found on the Internet
Devout Christians sometimes confuse ancient forms with modern
substance. "Once pagan, always pagan" is the way we once reasoned.
While we admitted the transforming power of Christ for people, we
denied it for customs and traditions. Yet many of the practices
God approved for ancient Israel had previously existed in
paganism. Temples, priests, harvest festivals, music in worship,
circumcision and tithing all had ancient pagan counterparts. God
transformed these customs into a form of worship devoted to him.
Even the sun, universally worshipped as a god by pagan cultures,
God used to symbolize an aspect of the Christ (Malachi 4:2).[2]
Footnotes
1.
http://www.didyouknow.cd/xmas/xmashistory.htm
2.
http://www.wcg.org/lit/church/holidays/xmassin.htm
|