ARTICLE: Is Christmas Pagan?

[STR Ambassador]

Is Christmas Pagan?

by Greg Koukl

The question of whether Christmas is pagan enters into the idea of cultural practices. Some have made the assertion that Christmas has pagan origins. Christmas does not have pagan origins, but there are winter celebrations that are pagan. There was, for example, a saturnal celebration around the time of Christmas that pagans celebrated, which was actually a temptation for Christians to participate in that had pagan content to it. So the church changed the day that they celebrated the birth of Christ. They used to celebrate it in the Spring. But the church said, We can celebrate it any time we want. Let's celebrate it at the same time the pagans are celebrating their pagan festival. It'll act as a contrast to that pagan festival because our celebration is the birth of the God-man, Jesus Christ. It has Biblical content. Plus it will protect Christians from being wooed away by this other celebration to participate in what was a pagan celebration.

It was really a wise thing that they did and the kind of thing that many missionaries do even nowadays. They take the momentum of a cultural practice--a cultural practice that may even have religious content to it, offensive religious content--and they redeem that for Christianity. They redefine what people have been doing. They reinvest it with new meaning. They capture the cultural form and they reinvest it with spiritual meaning.

By the way, there is an example of this in the Bible. Circumcision was practiced by the Egyptians before it was practiced by the Jews. It was a cultural practice which had some religious significance. God captured the practice, gave it to Abraham, reinvested it with new meaning and it became a religious rite for Abraham to worship his creator.

We think of circumcision as this really holy thing in the Old Testament associated with the covenant, which it was. But it wasn't that way originally. By golly, it seems to me that if God can do such a thing--take a practice that had heathen content to it, save the practice, reinvest new information to it--then it certainly is okay for the church to do it.

We've done that many times. We've done that in other cultures and it served to offer a springboard for us into cultures using cultural forms and reinvesting them with new meaning. If you read Don Richardson's books Eternity in Their Hearts or Peace Child, this is what he talks about. They captured cultural forms that had one meaning and reinvested it with a new meaning, and this became a springboard to reach into these cultures with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. And we've done the same thing with Christmas.

Now there is nothing at all wrong with that. We're not celebrating a pagan holiday because the pagan holiday was the saturnal and we're not worshipping the god of Saturn, or whatever the content was. We are not doing that. If you listen to the words of the song "Oh Christmas Tree, Oh Christmas Tree," the original was written with the Christmas tree being a type of Jesus Christ. You look at the words and the gospel is in the words of the Christmas tree. So this is not a Christmas tree that we're putting in our house as an idol to some tree god, or something like that. No, this is a tree that we are using as a cultural expression that can be invested with religious meaning for the Christian.

The same thing with the giving of gifts. That may have had a pagan meaning for others who practiced the other holiday. But for us giving of gifts is appropriate because it reflects the gift that God gave us in the person of Jesus.

My point is that we have liberty in reinvesting cultural forms with spiritual meaning. We have done that with Christmas. I don't think there is anything wrong with that at all. I think it's good and healthy for us to do so.

I think it can be legalistic to say one should not celebrate Christmas. There are different ways the term legalism can be used. One way it's used is to mean that we take laws that aren't God's laws, but are in fact man's laws, and we make them equal with God's laws. For example, we take a man's law that says we shouldn't smoke. Now the Bible doesn't say we shouldn't smoke, it doesn't say you shouldn't drink, it doesn't say you shouldn't go to movies. We take our rules that we apply in our church or denomination and apply it to all Christians. That's a type of legalism. In other words, we make things wrong that the Bible doesn't make wrong.

It appears that is what is going on with Christmas. If you celebrate the birth of Christ, then you're doing something wrong. My point is, this view is legalistic in that it makes things that aren't Scripturally wrong and it makes them wrong. It makes something a rule to apply to men when God didn't give them that rule.

I think the practice of Christmas is fully legitimate even though there may have some pagan elements that were originally associated with a celebration at this time. That doesn't make our celebration of Christmas the same as that old celebration. In fact, it's quite different. We are celebrating the birth of Jesus.

Now, we aren't obliged to do so. There is nothing in the Scripture that says that we ought to, but it strikes me that it is entirely appropriate. It is appropriate, but not obligatory. If you look back in the Old Testament, one of the things that God did is He arranged for the Jews to celebrate festivals that He established to remind themselves of the significance of that event by participating in these annual festivals year to year.

Even Hanukkah, the Festival of Lights, wasn't given by God in the Scriptures. It's something that they do to recollect a deliverance, a special deliverance, that God gave them during what we call the inter-testamental period, those 400 years between Malachi and Jesus. Theirs is a festival that is commonplace now but which doesn't have its source in a direct command in Scripture; but it does function like many of those other things that are in Scripture. It reminds people year to year of God's faithfulness and His goodness.

What we do on Christmas is focus on the birth of Jesus Christ. I don't understand how anyone can look at the Christmas carols that we sing during this time and say that this is pagan.

Even if the word Christmas came from the Catholic Christ Mass, it doesn't mean that now. This is a fallacy--going back to the original etymology of the word, and holding that if you say this word you are affirming that meaning instead of the meaning that you hold the word to have at the present moment. Words don't work that way. What the word Christmas means is the day that Christians celebrate the birth of Christ. That is what it means. There is not a bit of paganism in that, and for anyone to say that 500 years ago it meant this is inconsequential. It doesn't mean that anymore. When we say the word Christmas, we are not blaspheming. It just doesn't mean that. It just seems to be much ado about nothing.

Should a Christian celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ? That's really what we are talking about. Some say no. Why? Because when you celebrate the birth of the Messiah, you are doing something pagan. How does that make any sense? Should someone have a Christmas tree or stockings? That's a separate question. But should someone celebrate the birth of Christ? How could anybody object to that. I don't agree with the assessment of the stockings or Christmas tree either. Frankly, there are probably all kinds of things I could find in their daily life--their little habits and things that they do--that if you went back to their beginnings their foundation has all kinds of questionable ideology, but they don't have that significance for people now.

Actually, the language thing is a real important parallel because our words change meaning as time goes on. They are tokens for a particular meaning. At one point in history a word meant a particular thing, at a later point that word means something different so you can't say that when you use the term later on you're referring to the earlier meaning. That doesn't make sense.

By the same token, Christmas trees and gifts and stockings, and that kind of thing, are tokens also. Now tokens are only things that represent something else, like a bus token. A bus token represents a ticket to ride on the bus. It doesn't have meaning or value in itself; it's simply a token of something else. Technically, this other thing is called a type. Now it may have been that a Christmas tree was a token in the past of a pagan type. It betokened worshipping nature, for example. The Christmas tree for a Christian no longer betokens worshipping nature. It betokens worshipping Jesus.

A Christmas tree doesn't mean anything to me. It means Christmas trees are part of Christmas. The significant point here is that my tree has no pagan content. That's the critical issue. There is a difference between the true meaning of Christmas and the spirit of Christmas. They are entirely different things. One of them is theological, the second one is emotional.

The true meaning of Christmas has to do with Jesus Christ. It isn't about love, it isn't about giving, it isn't about peace on earth, it is about Jesus Christ. The other things may be related, but it isn't about those things.

The spirit of Christmas, in my view, has to do with the feeling you have. The feeling is a result of your past experiences with Christmas. For me, the spirit of Christmas has nothing to do with Jesus. But this is why I can say, I have a Christmas tree not because the Christmas tree reminds me of Jesus, though I could imagine for some people it does, and if you were taught early on that the Christmas tree is representative of theological truth, then that becomes a theological meaning for you. But for me a tree and ornaments are just my cultural expression that has to do with the emotional impact with Christmas, and I think that's fine.


Stand to Reason - Training Christians to be Ambassadors for Christ - www.str.org - http://www.str.org/free/commentaries/life/chrpagan.htm

Moderator Notice

Notice – The ministries featured in this section are guests of this site and very often not active members of debate forums. Additionally, this area is frequented and highlighted for guests who also very often are not acclimated to debate. As such, the rules of conduct here will be more strict than in the general forum. This will be something within the discretion of the Moderators, but we simply ask that you conduct yourselves in a manner considerate of the fact that these ministries are our invited guests. You can always feel free to start a related thread in general forum without such extra restrictions. Thank you.

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publically complain or whine, please take it to the Psychotherapy Room unless told otherwise.

[Durthorin]

An if we Pagans still celibrate this time for our old reasons you won't mind will you?

Danu Bless, Dur

[montoyama]

Greg,

Thanks for the clear thinking on Christmas. I seem to struggle with this every year, and I just needed to recognize that the content of my celebration, not that of those who worshipped Saturn, determines whether it is paganism or a worthwhile observance of Christ's Advent.

Yes, it's OK for Christians to celebrate Christmas, but not to idolize shopping and gift-giving, or to worship "Mother Nature."

--Mark

[STR Ambassador]

When it comes to deciding on the appropriateness of Christians celebrating different holidays, it's important to remember that you can't celebrate something that is not part of your intention of your celebration. Sometimes the morality of an act doesn't include the intention, for instance, if you could foresee consequences occurring as a result of your action despite that not being your intention. But the celebration of a holiday is almost identical with your intention. A good parallel to this might be Paul's discussion about eating meat sacrificed to idols.

STR Ambassador

[Non-Trinitarian]

Did first century Christians celebrate Jesus' birth?

[Non-Trinitarian]

01-07-2004 @ 06:27 PM post located here
Non-Trinitarian:

Did first century Christians celebrate Jesus' birth?

Since STR hasn't answered this, I will. The answer is a resounding no, based on multiple historical documents. In fact, early Christians wouldn't even celebrate birthdays.

[AcousticJS]

Sorry, just wondering, do you actually have a source that says early Christians didn't celebrate birthdays?

And, sorry if this takes the discussion of the article off-topic, would you say that celebrating birthdays are wrong?

[Dee Dee Warren]

01-13-2004 @ 08:32 AM post located here
Non-Trinitarian:



Since STR hasn't answered this, I will. The answer is a resounding no, based on multiple historical documents. In fact, early Christians wouldn't even celebrate birthdays.

The early JWs certainly did. Such legalism is unfathomable.

[Non-Trinitarian]

Today @ 11:43 AM post located here
Dee Dee Warren:



The early JWs certainly did. Such legalism is unfathomable.

Commenting on what a particular religion did/does in modern times is not an answer to the question and is really an avoidance of it.


Why Don’t Jehovah’s Witnesses Celebrate Birthdays?

Enjoying a feast or a party and generous giving to loved ones are certainly not wrong. (Luke 15:22-25; Acts 20:35) Jehovah’s Witnesses enjoy giving gifts and having good times together throughout the year. However, the only two birthday celebrations mentioned in the Bible involved people who were not true believers. They were a Pharaoh of Egypt and the Roman ruler Herod Antipas. There are no accounts of anyone who worshipped God celebrating his birthday. (Genesis 40:18-22; Mark 6:21-28) So it is not surprising to see these historical references to the attitude of early Christians toward birthday celebrations:

“The later Hebrews looked on the celebration of birth-days as a part of idolatrous worship, a view which would be abundantly confirmed by what they saw of the common observances associated with these days.”-The Imperial Bible Dictionary (London, 1874), edited by Patrick Fairbairn, Vol. I, p. 225

‘The notion of a birthday festival was far from the ideas of the Christians of this period in general.”—The History of the Christian Religion and Church, During the Three First Centuries (New York, 1848), Augustus Neander (translated by Henry John Rose), p. 190.

“the Jews regarded birthday celebrations as parts of idolatrous worship . . . , and this probably on account of the idolatrous rites with which they were observed in honor of those who were regarded as the patron gods of the day on which the party was born.”- Mc’Clintock and Strong’s Cyclopaedia (1882, Vol. I, p. 817

“Of all the holy people in the Scriptures, no one is recorded to have kept a feast or held a great banquet on his birthday. It is only sinners (like Pharaoh and Herod) who make great rejoicings over the day on which they were born into this world below."-The Catholic Encyclopedia (New York, 1911), Volume X, page 709

“The early Christians did not celebrate His [Christ’s] birth because they considered the celebration of anyone’s birth to be a pagan custom.”— The World Book Encyclopedia: Volume 3, page 416.


“Christians of the first century did not celebrate the festival honoring the birth of Jesus—for the same reason they honored no other birthday anniversary. It was the feeling at that time by all Christians that the celebration of all birthdays (even the Lord’s) was a custom of the pagans.”- The Christian Book of Why

“To the early Christians, birthdays were a pagan custom. It was unthinkable to celebrate one’s own birthday, much less the birthday of Christ.”-Frontier Magazine

“The celebration of the anniversary of an individual’s birth, though
customary among the ancients, was originally frowned upon by the Christians,” -Curiosities of Popular Customs

“The annual celebration of a person's birth probably originated in Egypt, where the birthdays of rulers and gods were celebrated with feasts. The early Christians did not celebrate birthdays at all." Encyclopedia of Days

"The ancient world of Egypt, Greece, Rome and Persia celebrated the birthdays of gods, kings, and nobles...Although the ancient Israelis kept records of the ages of their male citizens, there is no evidence that they had any festivities on the anniversary of the birth date" -Encyclopedia Americana 1991

Even Jesus’ birthday was not celebrated:
“The observance of Christmas is not of divine appointment, nor is it of NT origin. The day of Christ's birth cannot be ascertained from the NT, or, indeed, from any other source. The fathers of the first three centuries do not speak of any special observance of the nativity."-Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature (Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1981 reprint), by John McClintock and James Strong, Volume II, page 276


As far a ‘legalism’, that word is thrown around by a lot of people when they don’t like a principle in God’s Word. I’ve talked to Methodists and Presbyterians that call us “legalists” because we refuse to accept that pre-marital sex is acceptable. Their theory (not necessarily all Methodist and Presbyterians but some) is that as long as two people are in love and “plan” on getting married, it’s okay for them to have sex. Their call of us being “legalists” insults us in no way.

Is it wrong to celebrate birthdays today? I’m not going to get into a debate about whether it is or isn’t. But it is obvious early Christians did think it was wrong. If we pattern ourselves after them and thus earn the title “legalists”, so be it.

[Dee Dee Warren]

I have no opinion on your source material as to whether or not the early Christians celebrated birthdays. However, the JWs who have claimed to have been dispensing the right food at the right time, at time of such claim, were in fact celebrating birthdays, and allegedly Christ saw fit to make them His sole voice for His Kingdom in the world, now if Christ did not not make such a big deal out of it back in 1919, it seems strange that JWs today do.

Assuming arguendo your source material (I notice NO scholarly work but rather simply encyclopedia type items), the early Christians were not infallible, and could quite simply have been wrong. The Bible is our standard, and the birth of the Messiah was most certainly celebrated.

To say that to honor one's birth or one's mother is idolatry is simple idolatry of legalism, and thus a form of idolatry itself, setting up barriers to the Kingdom and a yoke that Christ never intended.

[Non-Trinitarian]

Today @ 02:29 PM post located here
Dee Dee Warren:

I have no opinion on your source material as to whether or not the early Christians celebrated birthdays...

Assuming arguendo your source material (I notice NO scholarly work but rather simply encyclopedia type items), the early Christians were not infallible, and could quite simply have been wrong. The Bible is our standard, and the birth of the Messiah was most certainly celebrated.

That's your argument? The early Christians may have been wrong? Yes, they celebrated the initial birth of the Messiah, but if the Bible is your standard, where does anyone celebrate his birthday? The only accounts of birthdays being celebrated in your standard (mine too)were done by pagans.

I beleive the sources quoted are quite reputable. I think it should be obvious to all that early Christians didn't celebrate birthdays nor Christmas. If they were wrong in doing that, I'll be glad to be wrong with them.

To say that to honor one's birth or one's mother is idolatry is simple idolatry of legalism, and thus a form of idolatry itself, setting up barriers to the Kingdom and a yoke that Christ never intended.

Then the early Christians put themselves under the same yoke. I'm fine with that. The end result is: Who is like the early Christians in this matter?

[Socrates]

Talk about arguing from silence. The JWs are as crass as those Church of Christ types who ban musical instruments. But if Sola Scriptura is true (as these people claim to follow as well), then is something is wrong it would be stated to be wrong, or it could be logically derived to be wrong. Birthdays, Christmas and musical instruments are NOT condemned anywhere in Scripture, and nor can any condemnation be reasonably inferred.

[Dee Dee Warren]

Today @ 10:56 AM post located here
Non-Trinitarian:


That's your argument? The early Christians may have been wrong?

You are using them as your argument by authority, and without any further scholarly support I view encycopedia entries with a jaundiced eye.

Yes, they celebrated the initial birth of the Messiah....

That is a birthday isn't it? So you have just refutred yourself.

, but if the Bible is your standard, where does anyone celebrate his birthday?

Was the Bible the standard of the 1919 Watchtower?

The only accounts of birthdays being celebrated in your standard (mine too)were done by pagans.

No Christ's birth was celebrated and only one other was mentioned and not condemned. Are you assuming that all things pagans do are wrong? Some things are simply neutral. Nice argument from evidence which cancels each other out.

I beleive the sources quoted are quite reputable. I think it should be obvious to all that early Christians didn't celebrate birthdays nor Christmas. If they were wrong in doing that, I'll be glad to be wrong with them.

You should be so glad to worship Jesus as they did, and as the 1919 Watchtower did. This cherry picking will not do.

Then the early Christians put themselves under the same yoke. I'm fine with that. The end result is: Who is like the early Christians in this matter?

They also unaminously prohibited any form of birth control. Are you going to concede that point to the Catholics?

[Non-Trinitarian]

You have nothing to argue. I can't help it if you don't accept encyclopedias and other books on the early Christians. People can judge between the sources I've offered and what they say versus the sources you've offered.

And I think it is obvious, or at least should be, that there is a difference between celebrating the initial birth of a child and celebrating birthdays. Surely you can see that. As far as actually celebrating the annual birthday, there were TWO mentioned in the Bible. Pharoah's and Herod's. Neither of whom were a worshipper of God.

Again, the fundamental truth, whether you like it or not, is that early Christians did not celebrate birthdays. The reason is because of all the pagan practices and spiritistic beliefs associated with it. Where did the cake come from? What did the candles stand for? The blowing them out and making a "wish"? What about giving gifts and the reason for having all your friends gather with you on your birthday in the first place? Do research on this and you will understand why early Christians felt about them the way they did.

Now does it matter today if we celebrate birthdays? Maybe not but we believe it does. If Jesus refused to celebrate birthdays due to the paganism associated with it, we feel best to go the same route.

I'm not going to keep debating this issue. Unless you have sound sources that back up your point, I see no reason to continue. If you want to celebrate birthdays, that's fine. The whole reason I brought up the question on whether Christians celebrated birthdays is because Greg Koukl said Christmas was not of pagan origin. He couldn't see why "anyone" would object to celebrating Jesus' birth. His attitude, even if he didn't say it, comes across as 'only an aetheist would object to celebrating Christ's birth.' Go back above and read his article. Do you see any scholarly quotes? Any historical references to defend his arguments? No. What we have is the opinion of Greg Koukl, who apparenlty is totally unaware that early Christians REFUSED to celebrate Jesus' birthday by all historical records.

In fact, he has a number of twisted reasonings in that one write-up, but that's beside the point. Since he had no support for his arguments other than the "but I think..." saying, I thought I'd bring a little more information to the table.

[musicman]

Dear "non-Trinitarian",

I think you missed the whole point of Greg's article. "Christmas" was never a pagan celebration. Yes, there were pagan celebrations going on at the same time - but pagans never celebrated the birth of Christ - only Christians did that.

You make much of the "fact" that first century Christians did not celebrate birthdays, or even Christ's birthday. What you are doing is equating cultural practices of first century Christians with the commands of Christ from scripture. Are the cultural practices of the early Christians to be considered equally inspired along with the Bible?

Paul, in 1 Corinthians 11, said that women should have their head covered when praying or prophesying in the worship service - if you are a woman, do you cover your head in the worship services where you attend? He said that men should not have long hair - do you know what length a man's hair was in the first century? Are men today sinning against Christ if their hair is longer than that of first century Christians? (How long was their hair anyway?).

I think you are making much ado about nothing. Jesus never said that we should or should not celebrate his (or anyone elses birthday). If it was that important, don't you think He would have mentioned it - (or the Apostles?).

You mention Pharoah and Herod as being the only ones mentioned in Scripture as having celebrated birthdays. I grant you these guys were not heroes of the faith, but aren't you giving birthdays a black eye only through guilt by association?

Even if your sources are correct that early Christians felt birthdays were pagan, you are resting your argument completely on (possibly) first century cultural practices/beliefs, not on Scripture.

If celebrating birthdays is pagan, then wouldn't also using the modern names for the days of the week be pagan too? Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, etc. are all English versions of the names of pagan gods. And how about the names of the months of the year? When you use them, aren't you giving indirect praise to these defunct pagan gods and Roman Emperors?

Musicman