Jason Engwer recently posted a response to James McGrath on Christmas. McGrath is a Jesus Seminar retread. McGrath's radical chic attack on Christmas was, in turn, picked up by militant apostate John Loftus.
However, Jason's post got quickly derailed into a debate over the Puritan view of Christmas. For now I'd like to make a few methodological observations.
1. Although ostensibly defending the Puritan view, some of the critics have actually recast the issue. They've recast the issue in terms of whether Christmas is obligatory, which they deny. This, in turn, shifts the burden of proof.
But that's not the traditional Puritan objection. Puritans stake out a far more aggressive and unyielding position.
They don't say Christians aren't obligated to celebrate Christmas.
Rather, they say Christians are obligated not to celebrate Christmas.
The nonobservance of Christmas is obligatory, rather than the observance of Christmas is nonobligatory.
Put another way, the critics are asking whether we think the nonobservance of Christmas is permissible, whereas the Puritans regarded the observance of Christmas as impermissible.
So that represents a fundamental inversion of the Puritan argument. Now, if the critics wish to distance themselves from the Puritan position, that's fine with me. But since the critics ordinarily pride themselves on their unwavering fidelity to the Westminster Standards, this introduces an awkward point of tension into their theological commitments. Do they or don't they represent Confessional Calvinism?
They clearly don't reflect Dutch-Reformed Confessional Calvinism on the status of Christmas. And it's unclear if they even reflect the Confessional Calvinism of the Westminster Divines at this juncture.
2. There's also considerable equivocation over "Christmas."
In this discussion, opposition to "Christmas" can mean more than one thing, such as:
i) Opposition to a formal, dated holiday.
ii) Opposition to the complete package of Christmas customs, including sacred and secular traditions alike.
iii) Opposition to celebrating the birth of Jesus.
iv) Opposition to a national Christmas holiday.
v) Opposition to an ecclesiastical Christmas holiday.
The critics trade on these equivocations, oscillating between one target and another. To have a productive debate, it's necessary that the critics clarify their target.
Incidentally, this is also pertinent to Jason's distinction between specific commands and generic principles.
Each Advent and Christmas, I expect the Puritan-boogey-men. Let it be.
ReplyDeleteWill hunker down for several weeks while pondering Isaiah and prescribed Nativity texts from the old 1662 BCP. With associated readings, commentaries, on those texts.
Adaiphora.
Let the Puritans opine, if not whine, while affording us Confessional Anglicans and Lutherans some liberty about the calendar.
Each year, I anticipate the usual boogey-men.
Regards.
Hello:
ReplyDeleteHere are some of my observations about Christmas after 20+ years of pastoral ministry.
What bothers me the most about Christmas? The self-absorbed refrain that -- it is all about Family. I will excuse this coming from someone who is not a disciple of Christ. But from a person who claims to follow Christ? No, I do not excuse it. Anything we do we are to do for the glory of God is what I believe Paul said.
So I observe increasingly and so do other pastors that people no longer even come to Christmas Eve services because they are doing the Family thing. Or if they do come their perspective is do not ask me to participate as I want to seat with my Family.
Christmas is often an extraordinary lonely and hurt filled time for many who either have no family or their family does not want them. Or, I have observed that these attempts to make it all about Family creates way too much pressure and a Good Night is not experienced.
Many families do have wonderful holidays and for that I have been and continue to be glad. But .... the message of the shepherds was to tell people about the birth of Christ, all that God had made known to them. It was what God wanted that counted and determined the shepherd's priorities. Not what their families wanted.
Should we be obligated to observe Christmas? No. Should we observe Christmas? Yes?
Why?
Well as Spurgeon put it in one of his Christmas sermons, this is a time that we can tell the story of what God has done and about what He has done in my life.
|To tell about what God has done and about what He has done in my life should be reason enough to hold any day as sacred to the Lord who will one day call us to account for how we have used the days we were given.
If the puritan position is simply being adopted for the sake of argument, or not, as you say - fine.
ReplyDeleteBut if the puritan position is being adopted on its own merit (say faithfully), in and of itself, the question is "Shouldn't the biblical position be the ones that counts (rather than the puritan one)?".
If I'm not mistaken, I think you've already addressed the biblical position on the celebration of Christmas (or at least you've addressed it biblically). I think you were fairly thorough in that effort.
Went to the Honolulu City Lights display Monday Night. The Nativity Scene was set in the back and hardly anyone visited the rear area in which it was seemingly hidden.
ReplyDeleteThe front of the block was dominated by giant figures of Santa Claus, Mrs. Claus, Frosty the Snowman, Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer, Giant blocks spelling "Mele Kalikimaka", a huge Christmas tree, etc....
You get the picture. The Enemy has co-opted Christmas just like the Easter bunny and decorated eggs co-opt the Resurrection of Easter.
Reasons why I cannot celebrate Christmas:
ReplyDelete1. Diminish the importance of the Lord's day.
2. Monuments of past by idolatry.
3. Idols themselves.
4. God commands that we work on common days and if there is no prohibition to work, such as the Sabbath, we are commanded to work and redeem the time (Exo 20:9, Eph 5:16).
5. Duet 12:29-32; Holy days such as Christmas are not simply traditional days for public remembrance, heritage or civil celebration but are synchristic acts of religious worship that combine elements of Christianity and paganism.
6. Not just a family day, but more solemn and religious than the weekly Sabbath.
7. The Lord’s Day is given to remember all of Christ’s work and has apostolic authority in it’s practice. No other day commemorating any other work of Christ is commanded or practiced by apostolic example and therefore forbidden.
8. Relics of idolatry are never to be Christianized as the Roman religion seeks. Therefore, our relationship to Christmas trees is at least analogous to what Hezekiah did to the brazen serpent that had of late been used in superstitious worship (2 Kings 18:4). He did not baptize it, he destroyed it.
9. Christmas DayThe day Jesus died is referred to as the Passover in John 18:39. This celebration begins after sundown on the 14th day of Nisan which on our calendar would be in the middle of March. According to Daniel 9:24-27 there are 70 weeks (Weeks are periods of seven years) determined for Israel. There are 69 weeks from the building of the temple to Messiah. The Messiah’s ministry is in the midst of the 70th week and an in the middle of this week he is killed and his death puts an end to the sacrificial system (Mat 27:51). Therefore, his ministry began at the end of the 69th week and continued until the middle of the 70th week, making his ministry exactly 3 and ½ years in duration. Jesus began his ministry when he was 30 (Luk 3:23) years old as was tradition among the Levite priests from the command of God in the law (Num 4:3). Therefore, his death was in mid March; 6 months before mid March is mid September and three years before that is obviously mid September. He began his ministry the same time as his 30th birthday, therefore he was born in the month of September not even close to December 25th . 10. Jesus was born and in the same day was lying in a manger (Luke 2:16). After eight days he received circumcision (vs
21). Even as Mat 2:1 and the context reveal, the magi who came bearing gifts came much later after his birthday; as is added by Mat 2:11 they found him in a house as compared with his manger birth. These were not birthday gifts and it was not the first Christmas celebration.
Common objections:
ReplyDeletei. Christ celebrated the feast of the dedication (John 10:22-23) which was not commanded.
Ans. The passage nowhere says he celebrated it. He simply arrives at a gathering of people for the purpose of preaching.
ii. Purim was observed by the Jews and it was not commanded (Est 9:26-29).
Ans. This is not a holy day but a civil celebration (Est 9:19-22).
iii. Paul kept the feast of Pentecost. Acts 20:16, 1 Cor 16:8
Ans. This is the Jewish Pentecost, for the Pentecost celebrated by the sheepish party the seventh Sunday after Easter (Celebrating the descent of the Holy Ghost) is celebrated in many places; yet Paul seeks to leave where he is presently writing to observe Pentecost and explicitly says in Acts 20 he would be coming to Jerusalem to observe it.
God commands that those things that are associated with idolatry be destroyed. Duet 12:29-32, Isa 30:22, Jude 23, Exo 34:13, Duet 7:25, Num 33:52, Rev 2:14, 20 (knowingly), Gen 35:4, 2 Kings 10:22-28, 2 Kings 23: 4, 5, 6, 7 ,2 Chron 23:15, Dan 1:8, 2 Kings 16:4, 10, 2 Chron 13:9, Exo 23:13, Duet 12:3,30, Josh 23:7. The purpose of this is so these religions will be forgotten and God's people will not ensnared by them. So, we determine what needs to be destroyed by this standard: could this thing that was used for idolatry of itself remind some person to return to that idolatry or of itself be a path back to it. Historical Examples: Chrysostom had temples of idols destroyed in Phoenicia; Constantine did not destroy the temples of the idols when he came into power and because of this Julian the Apostate was able to resurrect these idolatries. [EPC, 165] Angelic Virginity They say that they do that which the fathers have done. Yet Hezekiah breaks the brazen serpent which Moses had made. [2 Kings 18:4.]
God commands that those things that are associated with idolatry be destroyed. Duet 12:29-32, Isa 30:22, Jude 23, Exo 34:13, Duet 7:25, Num 33:52, Rev 2:14, 20 (knowingly), Gen 35:4, 2 Kings 10:22-28, 2 Kings 23: 4, 5, 6, 7 ,2 Chron 23:15, Dan 1:8, 2 Kings 16:4, 10, 2 Chron 13:9, Exo 23:13, Duet 12:3,30, Josh 23:7. The purpose of this is so these religions will be forgotten and God's people will not ensnared by them. So, we determine what needs to be destroyed by this standard: could this thing that was used for idolatry of itself remind some person to return to that idolatry or of itself be a path back to it. Historical Examples: Chrysostom had temples of idols destroyed in Phoenicia; Constantine did not destroy the temples of the idols when he came into power and because of this Julian the Apostate was able to resurrect these idolatries. [EPC, 165] Angelic Virginity They say that they do that which the fathers have done. Yet Hezekiah breaks the brazen serpent which Moses had made. [2 Kings 18:4.]
ReplyDeleteSo do you obey God and go around destroying Christmas trees, crucifixes, icons, etc., wherever you might find them, Drake?
Just curious about your level of obedience.
In Him,
CD
Well, Drake has zeal. But he seems to forget that Paul already addressed all this:
ReplyDelete---
One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord.
---
So unless Drake can show how the vast majority of Christians are *NOT* observing Christmas "in honor of the Lord" then I believe Paul's summary question stands: "Why do you pass judgment on your brother?"
Peter Pike wrote:
ReplyDelete== Well, Drake has zeal. But he seems to forget that Paul already addressed all this:
---
One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord.
---
So unless Drake can show how the vast majority of Christians are *NOT* observing Christmas "in honor of the Lord" then I believe Paul's summary question stands: "Why do you pass judgment on your brother?" ==
Let's think about how you view Drake in relation to this passage, Peter.Let's see if you are a hypocrite.You think that DRAKE is the "weaker brother" for not celebrating Christmas.If this is so, then what does this passage command? It commands YOU to NOT celebrate Christmas so as to not offend Drake, the "weaker brother"!
So let's see if you would obey something like that.
Let's now go into what this passage means as it relates to esteeming one day above another. Obviously, it is the "weaker brother" who esteems one day above another.
What are these days that the weaker brother esteems above other days? Is this talking about the man-made pagan-Romish holidays? Let's think about it.
Why would this person esteem certain days above other days? It is because at some point GOD COMMANDED IT!
He's not just esteeming any days above any other
days. This is confirmed by the fact that he believes it would be sin for him NOT to esteem certain days above other days! To him, it is a matter of commandment. Quite different than the man-made pagan-Romish holidays which God did NOT command.
Agrammatos said:
ReplyDelete---
Let's think about how you view Drake in relation to this passage, Peter.Let's see if you are a hypocrite
---
Good form, getting the well poisoning up out front. But it is obvious you have no idea what hypocrisy is if you could even think it would apply here. Where have I done anything that I've said Drake cannot do?
You said:
---
You think that DRAKE is the "weaker brother" for not celebrating Christmas.
---
When have I said which side is the "weaker brother"?
Oh wait. That's what PAUL said. Take it up with him then.
You said:
---
If this is so, then what does this passage command? It commands YOU to NOT celebrate Christmas so as to not offend Drake, the "weaker brother"!
---
Not at all. It states that Drake is not to judge me and I am not to judge Drake, for who are we to judge each other? Christ is the only one to judge us. Whether we observe the day or not, we do so to the Lord.
YOU, on the other hand, have explicitly violated the very teaching the passage is promoting. Thus, *YOU* are the hypocrite here.
Needless to say, nowhere in my post have I condemned Drake's decision not to observe Christmas, nor have I said he is wrong for abstaining, nor have I made one attempt to judge him. So get off your high horse before you get knocked off it--the second manner will cause you far more injury, Captain Hypocrite.
You further said:
---
Let's now go into what this passage means as it relates to esteeming one day above another. Obviously, it is the "weaker brother" who esteems one day above another.
---
By your own logic just stated in the above paragraphs attacking me, if the "weaker brother" esteems one day above another, then doesn't that mean *YOU* are commanded to observe the holiday?
Thanks for playing. Get your parting gift at the door.
"So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil" (Romans 14:16).
agrammatos,
ReplyDeleteCelebrations of Jesus' birth, including on December 25, go back to the ante-Nicene era. There's no reason to consider the Christians of that era Roman Catholic. To the contrary, much of what Catholicism teaches today, including the papacy, was widely absent or contradicted during that timeframe. Why should we consider a holiday originating with such people "Romish"?
As for the "pagan" part, see our recent posts on that subject, including my link to the Chronicon blog posted earlier today.
In his posts above, Drake Shelton makes many references to a modern calendar that has pagan associations ("Thursday", "Sunday", etc.). I assume you also use that calendar. Why is it acceptable for people like you to associate with paganism in that way?
Peter Pike wrote:
ReplyDeleteGood form, getting the well poisoning up out front. But it is obvious you have no idea what hypocrisy is if you could even think it would apply here. Where have I done anything that I've said Drake cannot do?
Chris:If Drake is offended or grieved because of your "food," then you are not to do anything by which your brother stumbles, or is offended, or is weak.
You cite Romans 14. But if you would obey Romans 14, then you are NOT to celebrate Christmas so as to not offend Drake.
Pike:
==When have I said which side is the "weaker brother"?
Oh wait. That's what PAUL said. Take it up with him then.==
Chris: Thanks for the concession, Pike. IF YOU think that Drake is the "weaker brother" then what are you to do? See Romans 14:20-21.
You said:
---
If this is so, then what does this passage command? It commands YOU to NOT celebrate Christmas so as to not offend Drake, the "weaker brother"!
---
Pike:
==Not at all. It states that Drake is not to judge me and I am not to judge Drake, for who are we to judge each other? Christ is the only one to judge us. Whether we observe the day or not, we do so to the Lord.==
Chris: You disregard Romans 14:13,15,20,21. The aforementioned verses describe what the attitude of the stronger is to be toward the weaker.
You further said:
---
Let's now go into what this passage means as it relates to esteeming one day above another. Obviously, it is the "weaker brother" who esteems one day above another.
---
Pike said:
==By your own logic just stated in the above paragraphs attacking me, if the "weaker brother" esteems one day above another, then doesn't that mean *YOU* are commanded to observe the holiday?==
Chris: In the context of Romans 14, what are these days that the weaker brother esteems above
other days? Why would this person esteem certain days above other days? Is it because he thinks observance of these days is indifferent or a matter of liberty? If so, why the grieving (Romans 14:15)over something that is indifferent?
Obviously, he believes it would be sin for him NOT to esteem certain days above other days!Thus, to him, it is a matter of commandment. Do you believe that observance of Christmas is a matter of commandment, and are you grieved by those who do not observe that which you believe God commanded?
Yeah, we all know that Christians are to be held in bondage to the lowest common denominator, Agrammatos. You haven't dealt with a single argument presented. You're just trying to bully your way to victory, but that doesn't work here.
ReplyDeleteRomans 14 does not say that one must submit to the weaker brother; it says one must not destroy the weaker brother through the exercising of one's freedom. Tell me how Drake's faith is damaged if anyone celebrates Christmas.
Frankly, Agrammatos, I see neither Drake nor myself as actually being a weaker brother here, because the weaker brother is the one who's faith is dependent upon whether or not a day is observed, or whether or not food is eaten. I know my faith is not shaken by Drake's (or yours, for that matter) ranting against Christmas, and I sure don't see a crisis of faith coming from either Drake or you. If there is one, you're hiding it awfully well.
But woe to you, who seek to shackle a fellow Christian with the chains of legalism, saying "don't touch" or "don't eat" and now, "don't celebrate." Somehow it strikes me that you're exactly the type of person who would say, "Why waste that perfume when it could have been sold and the money given to the poor."
Where do you get off on your almighty high horse to pass judgment here? Who are you to speak for God?
Christ did not set us free so that you can enslave us.
Pike, you wrote:
ReplyDelete==You haven't dealt with a single argument presented.==
I thought my comments and questions (which you have not answered)dealt with the following by Engwer:
>>It's true that scripture doesn't command a celebration of Christmas, but we have no reason to think that only holidays commanded by scripture are acceptable. If we can voluntarily regard one day as higher than another (Romans 14:5), then it logically follows that it's acceptable to have a holiday that isn't commanded by God.<<
In the context of Romans 14, what are these days that the weaker brother esteems above other days? Why would this person esteem certain days above other days? Is it not because these days were at one point in time, commanded by God? I think it's quite the logical stretch to say that observance of things commanded by God in the necessarily permits observance of things NOT commanded by God.
I note that Paul made no distinction as to *WHY* any particular day was held in esteem. You are wholly *inventing* that it's days formerly commanded by God to be observed. Paul was writing to the church in Rome, a city that had *MANY* holidays. He didn't bother to make a distinction in the text.
ReplyDeleteYet we're supposed to accept your eisegesis as dogma. You completely ignore the fact that Paul's quite aware of the idolatry of Rome, as he's more concerned with those who say you shouldn't eat meat sacrificed to idols than he is about the observance of certain days.
You've managed to miss the entire point Paul makes, in the process turning this passage on its head. An idol is NOTHING. That's why a Christian is free to eat meat sacrificed to an idol, and why a Christian is not condemned for observing holidays--so long as he does so to the Lord.
Your legalism is a false gospel.
But woe to you, who seek to shackle a fellow Christian with the chains of legalism, saying "don't touch" or "don't eat" and now, "don't celebrate." Somehow it strikes me that you're exactly the type of person who would say, "Why waste that perfume when it could have been sold and the money given to the poor."
ReplyDeleteWhere do you get off on your almighty high horse to pass judgment here? Who are you to speak for God?
Christ did not set us free so that you can enslave us.
And again:
You've managed to miss the entire point Paul makes, in the process turning this passage on its head. An idol is NOTHING. That's why a Christian is free to eat meat sacrificed to an idol, and why a Christian is not condemned for observing holidays--so long as he does so to the Lord.
Your legalism is a false gospel.
This is GOLD, Peter! Well said, brother!
In Him,
CD
Jason Engwer, you had written:
ReplyDeleteIn his posts above, Drake Shelton makes many references to a modern calendar that has pagan associations ("Thursday", "Sunday", etc.). I assume you also use that calendar. Why is it acceptable for people like you to associate with paganism in that way?
To call a day something is not the same as (not even close to) celebrating something.When I say, "I'm going to the store on Thursday," I'm not celebrating Thursday. When I say, "I'm going to the store on Christmas," I'm not celebrating Christmas.
agrammatos wrote:
ReplyDelete"To call a day something is not the same as (not even close to) celebrating something.When I say, 'I'm going to the store on Thursday,' I'm not celebrating Thursday."
You're either ignoring or redefining the comments by Drake Shelton that I was responding to. He didn't just refer to what's "celebrated". He referred to "relics", what's "associated" with idolatry, ensuring that false religions will be "forgotten", etc. He wrote:
"Relics of idolatry are never to be Christianized as the Roman religion seeks. Therefore, our relationship to Christmas trees is at least analogous to what Hezekiah did to the brazen serpent that had of late been used in superstitious worship (2 Kings 18:4). He did not baptize it, he destroyed it....God commands that those things that are associated with idolatry be destroyed....The purpose of this is so these religions will be forgotten and God's people will not ensnared by them."
When you use a calendar with terms like "Thursday", are you using something associated with paganism, that reminds people of paganism, etc.? Yes, you are. You fall under Drake's condemnation, just as Drake himself does.
Furthermore, Christians who celebrate Christmas aren't celebrating paganism. What are you criticizing them for, then? Are you criticizing them for celebrating something good (Jesus' birth) by means of some things that have had pagan associations? If so, why is it acceptable for you and your church to celebrate good things, worship God, etc. by means of a calendar that's had pagan associations?