MikeSavage
Active Member
The scriptures DO indicate that.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Does Christmas have anything to do with Christ?
- Thread starter Desert Snake
- Start date
sincerly
Well-Known Member
'mud said: ↑
Was it a house or a manger.....were the Nuns wrong ???
Was Matt wrong ? Well I'll be damned !
~
Get out the oils olive, I need a salad !
~
Neither was wrong. Yes. the events surrounding the life and birth of Jesus was written by different writers. One had been a disciple of Jesus and the other after being with Paul(who was later taught by Jesus). One was an eye witness to the last 3 1/2 years of Jesus' life and the other had gathered material for the writing/account from various sources who were eyewitnesses or were in agreement with such.
As John wrote,who didn't focus his writing upon the nativity, but the adult life of Jesus and purpose for being born as a human being wrote, (John 21:25), "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."
Those who want to denounce the Scriptures by the writers/Prophets not reporting the same exact events(years after the events) are denouncing the reporters and historians of today. Yes, there were false prophets then and false teachers/naysayers today. It is only those who were inspired by GOD who are True.(and they agree to/with the Principles as given by GOD.)
Luke does not record anything about the visit of the "Wise-men".
Matthew does not record the shepherd's and Angel's events.
Neither is negative information, but only enforces the leading of GOD in the events.
The reason for being in Bethlehem was two fold. 1. Jesus was prophesied to be born there and 2. God's leading the events was the taxing human requirement insured that it would happen.
Since those events took place, there was no reason to stay there.
They headed back and at Jerusalem Jesus and Mary performed the necessary circumcision(8days) and purification rites(33days). It was there that the star directed the wisemen to the house where Jesus was. Not 15 months after the birth (as you propose), but within prophesied events.(Simeon/Anna)
Even to the getting out of town.
Was it a house or a manger.....were the Nuns wrong ???
Was Matt wrong ? Well I'll be damned !
~
Get out the oils olive, I need a salad !
~
Neither was wrong. Yes. the events surrounding the life and birth of Jesus was written by different writers. One had been a disciple of Jesus and the other after being with Paul(who was later taught by Jesus). One was an eye witness to the last 3 1/2 years of Jesus' life and the other had gathered material for the writing/account from various sources who were eyewitnesses or were in agreement with such.
As John wrote,who didn't focus his writing upon the nativity, but the adult life of Jesus and purpose for being born as a human being wrote, (John 21:25), "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."
Those who want to denounce the Scriptures by the writers/Prophets not reporting the same exact events(years after the events) are denouncing the reporters and historians of today. Yes, there were false prophets then and false teachers/naysayers today. It is only those who were inspired by GOD who are True.(and they agree to/with the Principles as given by GOD.)
Luke does not record anything about the visit of the "Wise-men".
Matthew does not record the shepherd's and Angel's events.
Neither is negative information, but only enforces the leading of GOD in the events.
The reason for being in Bethlehem was two fold. 1. Jesus was prophesied to be born there and 2. God's leading the events was the taxing human requirement insured that it would happen.
Since those events took place, there was no reason to stay there.
They headed back and at Jerusalem Jesus and Mary performed the necessary circumcision(8days) and purification rites(33days). It was there that the star directed the wisemen to the house where Jesus was. Not 15 months after the birth (as you propose), but within prophesied events.(Simeon/Anna)
Even to the getting out of town.
sincerly
Well-Known Member
Mike, you were doing well during the first of the post, but here scripturally you missed the mark/teaching contrary to the Scriptures.
Jesus and HIS instruction concerning the two resurrections gives no time for one to be taught. The death of one closes the ability to change one's mind. The first resurrection is at the beginning of the 1000 years and the Second resurrection of the wicked is at the end of that period of time.
sincerly
Well-Known Member
A correct understanding of the scriptures settles a lot of things. However, one has the freedom to disbelieve or to believe during one's life-time.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
I don't celebrate that.
The miraculous virginal birth of our saviur Jesus is an extremely relevant event in human history, as recorded in the synoptic Gospels, second only to his resurrection after death. It is obvius that Christianity celebrates it , no matter whether the date of such celebration coincides with His real date of birth or not.
It is up to us Christians not to let it be stolen by merchants and not believers to make it just a shopping event.
It is up to us Christians not to let it be stolen by merchants and not believers to make it just a shopping event.
MikeSavage
Active Member
It's a little late for that. It is evident in the creation of Santa Claus, and the shopping frenzies that take place.
sincerly
Well-Known Member
62peppe said: ↑The miraculous virginal birth of our saviur Jesus is an extremely relevant event in human history, as recorded in the synoptic Gospels, second only to his resurrection after death. It is obvius that Christianity celebrates it , no matter whether the date of such celebration coincides with His real date of birth or not.
The Believers in the Birth of Jesus Christ will celebrate the event no matter the date assigned.OR what is presented to nullify the significants.
The Believers in the Birth of Jesus Christ will celebrate the event no matter the date assigned.OR what is presented to nullify the significants.
MikeSavage
Active Member
Now hold on there. I am a believer in the birth of Jesus. I do not celebrate his birth, but I memorialize his death as he commanded us to do, the night before he died. He said his birth was of no significance, but his death was. His sacrifice affected billions, his birth, none. His birth wasn't a sacrifice. His death was. Christmas doesn't exist in the scriptures. The Christ's death does. Christendom celebrates his birth. True Christianity memorializes his death. True Christianity is not religion, Christendom is. Big differences.
I'm no expert on our Christian Bible, only a person trying to learn and understand the truth found in Scripture. No easy task given our Bible has been translated from ancient languages, mistranslated a lot also. We try our best.
It's my understanding Jesus was first and foremost a Jew. In Christs time Jews didn't celebrate b-days but tracked a persons age by approx. date of conception.
B-days were irrelevant to the Jews. Christmas is clearly an attempt by the early Holy Roman Church to combine pagan images with Christian images to gain coverts.
If we simply read an encyclopedia we can clearly see that Santa, the yule log, evergreen tree, virtually every symbol of modern Christmasses we know is pagan in origin. Jews didn't mark b-days, symbols of Christmas are pagan in origin.
So would celebrating today's Christmas be something that Jesus would approve of? Even recongnize? Would God be offended at the pagan symbols that consitute Christmas? These things true Christians must examine closely with good conscience and dertermine if celebrating Dec. 25th as Christs birth has any value or significance or has Christs birth been bastardized into something pagan to serve a very clever Satan????????
It's my understanding Jesus was first and foremost a Jew. In Christs time Jews didn't celebrate b-days but tracked a persons age by approx. date of conception.
B-days were irrelevant to the Jews. Christmas is clearly an attempt by the early Holy Roman Church to combine pagan images with Christian images to gain coverts.
If we simply read an encyclopedia we can clearly see that Santa, the yule log, evergreen tree, virtually every symbol of modern Christmasses we know is pagan in origin. Jews didn't mark b-days, symbols of Christmas are pagan in origin.
So would celebrating today's Christmas be something that Jesus would approve of? Even recongnize? Would God be offended at the pagan symbols that consitute Christmas? These things true Christians must examine closely with good conscience and dertermine if celebrating Dec. 25th as Christs birth has any value or significance or has Christs birth been bastardized into something pagan to serve a very clever Satan????????
MikeSavage
Active Member
All excellent points. The messiah, Jesus, would be offended I believe. His Father would be very offended if one used anything pagan, touched anything pagan, or celebrated anything with ANYTHING pagan about it. Jesus wasn't born in winter, but in fall. Jesus said his birth was INSIGNIFIGANT, but his death was VERY SIGNIFICANT, and he told the annointed first Chjristians to memorialize his death. His death was a propitiatory sacrifice so that we may have the CHANCE of gaining forgiveness, and righteousness, if we do what is required to gain that forgiveness. Prior to that sacrifice, Israel had to spill animal blood which really was not the same as human blood. It wasn't even or equal. Jesus gave his life to even up the blood spilled. Birthday celebrating is wholly pagan. Israel ignored them. Christendom, all religions CLAIMING to be Christian, are not really so. They are Christendom. Half pagan, half Christian. Christianity is not religion, Christendom is. Jesus told John, while he was a prisoner on Patmos, that ALL religion was false, and is Babylon the Great, and would be totally wiped from the Earth in the final battle. It is religion that celebrates Christmas, not Christianity. Paul's letter to the annointed Christians in Galatia said that sects/divisions/denominations are works of the flesh. He was in effect saying that all the religions that came to be after Jesus' death would prevent one from attaining righteousness. It's participants would not ever inherit the Kingdom of the Heavens (whose domain is Earth), ruled by Jesus.
Santa Claus isn't Pagan. He is based very loosely on St. Nicholas, who did various things of a helpful nature. Kind of a legend.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Agreed. I joke around about Santa but really, there is nothing 'pagan' about him.
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
Tree decorating, holly, feasts, gifts, fires, and caroling however, were northwestern European traditions to honor the rebirth of the Dying God and the sun. Which is precisely why it was the perfect holiday to appropriate when converting those peoples.
Not that *I* have any objection to sharing traditions. Although I would appreciate it if you folks would at least give a nod to the fact that the evergreen is honored as symbolic of the eternal nature of life and stop using dead ones.
Not that *I* have any objection to sharing traditions. Although I would appreciate it if you folks would at least give a nod to the fact that the evergreen is honored as symbolic of the eternal nature of life and stop using dead ones.
Cephus
Relentlessly Rational
Just like Jesus.
MikeSavage
Active Member
As Montgomery Ward, as he invented Santa Claus in the heyday of his department stores, as a way to get mothers to bring their children into the store. Saint means holy, and no man can tell heaven or God Almighty to make someone holy post mortem.