• 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!

Should Christians celebrate Christmas

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
Even one is too much poison. But with Christmas, there are several:

December 25 was worship of the Roman Sun god, Saturnalia.

The tree has its origins with Tammuz, one of the oldest gods in human history.

How sad to dirty our Savior by mixing in false deities!

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False Religions/Other Pagan Mumbo-Jumbo/christmas.htm

Indeed, we know it is all Pagan, and they should understand this base.

However, - you miss words like these - which I will repeat -


1Co 10:27 If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.

1Co 10:28 For if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:

1Co 10:29 Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another man's conscience?

1Co 10:30 For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of, for that for which I give thanks?

1Co 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.



*
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
Indeed, we know it is all Pagan, and they should understand this base.

However, - you miss words like these - which I will repeat -


1Co 10:27 If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.

1Co 10:28 For if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:

1Co 10:29 Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another man's conscience?

1Co 10:30 For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of, for that for which I give thanks?

1Co 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.



*

I understand what you are saying; I also understand the origin of many aspects of Christmas -- there is no "question" to ask!

But, like in vs.28, when one finds out the truth, then "eat not".

Do not knowingly partake of food from a feast dedicated to a false god, that's "the table of demons." Food is food, but if you know it was used in the celebration of a false god, by partaking you could be viewed as supporting that God.
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
I understand what you are saying; I also understand the origin of many aspects of Christmas -- there is no "question" to ask!

But, like in vs.28, when one finds out the truth, then "eat not".

Do not knowingly partake of food from a feast dedicated to a false god, that's "the table of demons." Food is food, but if you know it was used in the celebration of a false god, by partaking you could be viewed as supporting that God.

You are misreading #28.

Read the whole thing in context.

Number one right off the bat says if you are invited to a feast (pagan) - EAT-!

28 says IF ANY MAN SAY UNTO YOU ...

Then # 29 says you are not judged on another (that) man's conscience. It is a reply to the error of "IF ANY MAN SAY UNTO YOU."

Number 30 adds to that with - if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of, (again showing that this man's judgment of the EATER is wrong.)

Ending with 31 wrapping things up.

1Co 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

In other words go ahead and EAT, for it is what is in YOUR HEAD that counts. Your host consecrating the food to a foreign God, is not YOU. You don't believe in those Gods - so it is - in your mind, not consecrated to anything by them, - and is IN YOUR MIND - consecrated to YOUR God.

*
 
Last edited:

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
You are misreading #28.

Read the whole thing in context.

Number one right off the bat says if you are invited to a feast (pagan) - EAT-!

28 says IF ANY MAN SAY UNTO YOU ...

Then # 29 says you are not judged on another (that) man's conscience. It is a reply to the error of "IF ANY MAN SAY UNTO YOU."

Number 30 adds to that with - if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of, (again showing that this man's judgment of the EATER is wrong.)

Ending with 31 wrapping things up.

1Co 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

In other words go ahead and EAT, for it is what is in YOUR HEAD that counts. Your host consecrating the food to a foreign God, is not YOU. You don't believe in those Gods - so it is - in your mind, not consecrated to anything by them, - and is IN YOUR MIND - consecrated to YOUR God.

*
The KJV, huh? (I thought that is how you understood it) Read 1 Corinthians 10:28 at Biblehub. Reading the passage in other Bibles, whatever we're reading, is always good.

Even the KJV gives the correct understanding, you just have to be aware of it....
Vs.28: "But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof"

The grammatical structure, using the conjugation "and", not "nor", gives the understanding of "eat not," not "eat,".

Take care.
 
Last edited:

MARCELLO

Transitioning from male to female
Yes, christians should celebrate xmas,maybe not for religious reasons as we all know this tradition is coming from pagan nordic culture but for family values and then passed to the christian culture. It feels nice to get postcards from the beloved ones and it is the only family gathering where you can see your old ones and youngest ones altogether.

It also feels nice to embrace God and chant in carols.

I appreciate any peaceful and positive ,humanistic tradition of any religion.
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
The KJV, huh? (I thought that is how you understood it) Read 1 Corinthians 10:28 at Biblehub. Reading the passage in other Bibles, whatever we're reading, is always good.

Even the KJV gives the correct understanding, you just have to be aware of it....
Vs.28: "But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof"

The grammatical structure, using the conjugation "and", not "nor", gives the understanding of "eat not," not "eat,".

Take care.

It speaks for itself if read in context.

1Co 10:26 For the earth is the Lord's, and ALL that is gathered from it.

1Co 10:27 If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience (perception) sake.


KJV - 1Co 10:28 But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:

MINE - 1Co 10:28 But if any man to you says - This is an offering to idols. Don't eat it for the reason declared, likewise for consciousness (this perception) - but for this reason; the earth is the Lord's, and ALL that is gathered from it.


1Co 10:29 Conscience (perception), I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another man's conscience (perception?)

1Co 10:30 For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks?

1Co 10:31 If therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, appoint all to the glory of God.

1Co 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:

One sentence - #28 is being read wrong by you folks - throwing off the whole text.

Above these we are told ALL IS LAWFULL but perhaps not expedient - BUT!!!! If invited by Pagans - EAT - for ALL is God's.

1Co 10:23 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.

Note that 26 and 28 use the same phrase.

My translation of 28 is from the Greek.

*
 
Last edited:

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Yes, christians should celebrate xmas,maybe not for religious reasons as we all know this tradition is coming from pagan nordic culture but for family values and then passed to the christian culture. It feels nice to get postcards from the beloved ones and it is the only family gathering where you can see your old ones and youngest ones altogether
It also feels nice to embrace God and chant in carols.
I appreciate any peaceful and positive ,humanistic tradition of any religion.

In Scripture Jesus instructed his followers to keep a memorial of his death ( Not birth ) - Luke 22:19
Jesus nor his first-century followers celebrated birthdays, and Jesus was Not born on Dec. 25th, so Dec. 25th is a false birth date.
So, why should Jesus' followers celebrate a non-biblical holiday when friends and family can have gatherings whenever they choose.
 

InChrist

Free4ever
The birth of Jesus Christ is a biblical event of events. The birth, life, death, and resurrection of the Savior is a momentous event which not only impacted history, but eternity. The church and believers who make up the Body of Christ have every reason to acknowledge and joyfully celebrate such a glorious work of God.
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
The birth of Jesus Christ is a biblical event of events. The birth, life, death, and resurrection of the Savior is a momentous event which not only impacted history, but eternity. The church and believers who make up the Body of Christ have every reason to acknowledge and joyfully celebrate such a glorious work of God.

However, supposedly he made a request to remember the Eucharist, and not his birthday.

Plus we know it is not the correct date. Nor was he born of a virgin. That was a misreading/mistranslation of Isaiah. So false made-up information.

So we actually are given nothing about his birth.

*
 

InChrist

Free4ever
However, supposedly he made a request to remember the Eucharist, and not his birthday.

Plus we know it is not the correct date. Nor was he born of a virgin. That was a misreading/mistranslation of Isaiah. So false made-up information.

So we actually are given nothing about his birth.

*
Not necessarily. I have researched this subject in depth for personal reasons and there is enough evidence to convince me that the date could be His birth date from the perspective of the early church. As afar as the info concerning the virgin birth, it is not misreading/translation. false or made up from my perspective, on the contrary, completely true.

He did request that His death be remembered, but that is far different than the Eucharist.
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
Not necessarily. I have researched this subject in depth for personal reasons and there is enough evidence to convince me that the date could be His birth date from the perspective of the early church. As afar as the info concerning the virgin birth, it is not misreading/translation. false or made up from my perspective, on the contrary, completely true.

He did request that His death be remembered, but that is far different than the Eucharist.

What?

There is no prophecy of a "virgin" birth in Isaiah. It is MAIDEN - nothing supernatural.

The "virgin" birth, angels singing, shepherds, magi bearing gifts, death of other male babies, etc., are taken from other god-man birth stories - to give Jesus credence as a god-man.

Eucharist = the Christian ceremony commemorating the Last Supper, in which bread and wine are consecrated and consumed.

Quotes below from BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGY - How December 25th Became Christmas. http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/...w-testament/how-december-25-became-christmas/

"The extrabiblical evidence from the first and second century is equally spare: There is no mention of birth celebrations in the writings of early Christian writers such as Irenaeus (c. 130–200) or Tertullian (c. 160–225). Origen of Alexandria (c. 165–264) goes so far as to mock Roman celebrations of birth anniversaries, dismissing them as “pagan” practices—a strong indication that Jesus’ birth was not marked with similar festivities at that place and time.1 As far as we can tell, Christmas was not celebrated at all at this point."

"There are two theories today: one extremely popular, the other less often heard outside scholarly circles (though far more ancient).4

The most loudly touted theory about the origins of the Christmas date(s) is that it was borrowed from pagan celebrations. The Romans had their mid-winter Saturnalia festival in late December; barbarian peoples of northern and western Europe kept holidays at similar times. To top it off, in 274 C.E., the Roman emperor Aurelian established a feast of the birth of Sol Invictus (the Unconquered Sun), on December 25. Christmas, the argument goes, is really a spin-off from these pagan solar festivals. According to this theory, early Christians deliberately chose these dates to encourage the spread of Christmas and Christianity throughout the Roman world: If Christmas looked like a pagan holiday, more pagans would be open to both the holiday and the God whose birth it celebrated."

"round 200 C.E. Tertullian of Carthage reported the calculation that the 14th of Nisan (the day of the crucifixion according to the Gospel of John) in the year Jesus diedc was equivalent to March 25 in the Roman (solar) calendar.9 March 25 is, of course, nine months before December 25; it was later recognized as the Feast of the Annunciation—the commemoration of Jesus’ conception.10 Thus, Jesus was believed to have been conceived and crucified on the same day of the year. Exactly nine months later, Jesus was born, on December 25.d

This idea appears in an anonymous Christian treatise titled On Solstices and Equinoxes, which appears to come from fourth-century North Africa. ..."

SO - NO actual December 25th birth.

And isn't it funny that the oldest idea includes Solstices and Equinoxes. 4th Century!

Hilarious that people laugh and say not that zodiac crap again. LOL!

*
 
Last edited:

Muffled

Jesus in me
Even one is too much poison. But with Christmas, there are several:

December 25 was worship of the Roman Sun god, Saturnalia.

The tree has its origins with Tammuz, one of the oldest gods in human history.

How sad to dirty our Savior by mixing in false deities!

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False Religions/Other Pagan Mumbo-Jumbo/christmas.htm

I don't believe I have anything to do with Saturnalia, so the coincidental date means nothing. I suppose there are some people who share a birthday with Hitler but that doesn't make them Nazis.

I don't think of Tammuz when I look at a tree and I believe it is shameful for you to do so.

I believe my savior is kept quite holy and separate from such things
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
John 10:30 I and the Father are one.

We have been over this before.

"I and the father are one" - merely means in agreement. Just like saying I and the President are one. Or I and my husband are one.


Joh 10:15 As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.

Joh 10:24 Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. - (The Messiah - not a God.)

Joh 10:25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.

Joh 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

Joh 10:30 I and my Father are one.

Joh 10:32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

Joh 10:33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

Joh 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? - (actually Theos - also meaning Chosen, Anointed, Magistrates, etc.)

Joh 10:35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

Joh 10:36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Joh 10:37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.

*

In John 10 Jesus is not claiming to be GOD, - he has challenged the Priest Judges, saying he is the Anointed, Judge, or Magistrate. The Messiah was to bring the end and FINAL JUDGMENT!

When they claim he blasphemes, he quotes from Psalm 82 - Which is a whole section on bad judges, where in Psalm 82:6 they are told "I said, 'You are (Elohiym), And all of you are the sons of the Most High."

Elohiym as has been mentioned many times - does not just mean gods - and in this case it is saying they shall be righteous Judges over the Israelites.

Jesus is saying (as per the OT quote) He is a/or THE Anointed Judge/Magistrate.

John 10:34 Jesus answered them: Is it not written in your law: I said, you are theos?

Both Elohiym in the Hebrew and theos in the greek have the meaning Judge/Magistrate, as well as god.

This is obviously the meaning as the OT people aren't GODS. And note "they" like Jesus, are "sons of the most high."


*
"Ye are gods (theoi este). Another direct quotation after eipa but without hoti. The judges of Israel abused their office and God is represented in Psa_82:6 as calling them "gods" (theoi, elohim) because they were God’s representatives. See the same use of elohim in Exo 21:6, Exo 22:9, Exo 22:28. Jesus meets the rabbis on their own ground in a thoroughly Jewish way." - Robertson's WORD Pictures of the New Testament."

*

John 10:34-36

"Is it not written in your law
— in Psa_82:6, respecting judges or magistrates.

Ye are gods — being the official representatives and commissioned agents of God." - Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown, Commentary.

*

"In your law - Psa_82:6. The word "law" here, is used to include the Old Testament.

I said - The Psalmist said, or God said by the Psalmist.

Ye are gods - This was said of magistrates on account of the dignity and honor of their office, and it shows that the Hebrew word translated "god," אלהים̀elohiym, in that place might be applied to man. Such a use of the word is, however, rare. See instances in Exo 7:1; Exo 4:16." - Albert Barnes Notes On the Bible.

*

Exo 7:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god (Elohiym) to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.


*
 
Last edited:

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Please read John 17:20-22, you'll see how Jesus meant that. This is the only way to understand this, considering John 14:28, and John 20:17. (Who was He praying to, all those times?)

Jesus doesn't specify who the ''father'' is. I think it is metaphor. It could be Zeus, or someone else.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Please read John 17:20-22, you'll see how Jesus meant that. This is the only way to understand this, considering John 14:28, and John 20:17. (Who was He praying to, all those times?)

I believe you can't substantiate that statement and I believe it is the wrong way.

I don't believe it makes any difference. Why do you think so?
 
Top