|
In Season and Out Of Season Christmas means a lot of things to a variety of people. To the kids, it's Present Time. To some adults, a season of love and peace and joy, a welcome break from the trials of life. For others, a frantic rush from store to store to get the shopping done with one eye on the bank account. To some businesses, Christmas means large financial gains. To other religions, the Season is a chance to advance multiculturalism through celebration of The Holidays. To the atheist, it's an infringement of rights. To the Christian........? What does Christmas mean to the Christian? Or should it mean anything at all? For those who see the holiday as a time of witness to Christ, what is the message to be delivered? Is the call to put Christ back into Christmas a legitimate entreaty? Let's begin there. I found a short article on the internet (http://www.bibleforum.com/articles/#religousholidays/) that summarizes quite well the origins of Christmas, including the meaning of the word itself:
Although Christmas is widely celebrated in both secular and religious ways, there is great debate about such celebration. Christian AND even voices from the secular world defend the rituals and festivities of Christmas, including the use of the phrase, "Merry Christmas." The whole thing only leads me to ask, "What are we doing? Why have we allowed ourselves to be drawn into these worldly battles?" The debates, the law suits, the seething hatred for Christianity, the Christian's strong stance - a true field of chaos breeding division, confusion and argument. If you dig deeply enough, you can find people on both sides of the fence taking both sides of the argument - either defending or battling against the Christmas holiday. While I was considering the various Christian views on how to handle it all, I came across the article by Sherry Neese, "Who Took Christ Out of Christmas?" and sent it out to the list. Sherry's basic message was this, that no matter how you handle this time, do it with Christian fruit and character. But later, after sending it out and thinking about the conclusion, I personally was not sure that is going far enough. I asked myself, "How would I answer questions concerning this troublesome holiday of Christmas, considering its origin in pagan festivals, its place in family traditions, the fact that it's commercialized beyond repair, and that it's used as a stomping-ground by anti-Christians?" Here are my thoughts about the whole situation. The birth of Christ is not the FULL message of Christ. Nor is His death. Nor is His resurrection. Nor is His ascension and glorification. Nor is His promise to return. Nor is His coming Millennial Reign. Nor is His one day giving all things back to the Father. These are only parts of the whole. As Christians, we have the revelation of the WHOLE CHRIST. We know Him in His entirety. We know the parts and we see them as a whole. When we think of His birth, we look ahead in our hearts to see the reason for His birth was His death. When we look at His death, we look beyond it to the empty tomb. When we look at the empty tomb, our hearts look up to see Him at the right hand of the Father. You get the picture. Except for serious study, none of the truths should be separated from the whole truth in order to keep our message intact. To separate one part of that message and allow the world to bombard the fact of it with cunning destruction only gives us what we have now - a time of confusion, debate and worldliness. There is a lot of truth in the statement, "Divide and conquer." First Things First When I began refuting the beliefs of other religions and apostasy within Christianity, one of the first things I learned was to clarify terminology. The second-to-last paragraph of the above article made me think. The cause of a lot of the friction today is the word "Christmas." As Christians, we can explain and correct the "Christmas terminology" in this way: we will no longer discuss the celebration of Christmas. We don't celebrate Christmas; we celebrate the person of Christ in His entirety. We will discuss any opposition to us if you want to talk about our right to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ, not Christmas. If it's a matter of Church and State, let the courts decide, but we have a whole message built on Jesus' being sent from Heaven, born of a Virgin. This point alone is very powerful. The change in terms (and of course it's more than that) is powerful. It immediately places everyone on one of two sides: you are either for Christ or against Him. Christmas has many, many connotations in the modern world: presents, trees, holly, Jesus Christ, Santa Claus, financial gain, mangers, wise men, the virgin Mary, Rudolph, etc. The birth of Christ only has one: God sent His sinless Son into the world to become flesh, born of a virgin. And the reason He sent Him was to die for the sins of the world. You are either going to stand for that or opppose it. The lines are drawn according to God's word. It's the full Gospel, which bites to the heart of the matter. When the world wants to debate Christmas, our response has to be, "Christmas" is too ambiguous a word anymore. Let's discuss the Person who was born 2000 years ago, and clarify who is for Him and against Him. God already knows. Though the use of the word "season" in the following verses doesn't refer to the Christmas season, I believe Paul's exhortation is appropriate concerning what I have tried to relate:
Fables? "Christmas" fables are in abundance. According to Paul, the Gospel should also be in abundance for all to have the opportunity to believe. ================ This newsletter will be sent out whenever I think there is something the body of Christ needs to consider, to build it up, to give it encouragement or comfort in hard times. To sign up for this newsletter, email Ed at edju@velocity.net |