Christmas ‘05

Yes, I know I despise Christmas; you don’t have to remind me of that.

No, I haven’t forgotten it… Really.

I am surrounded on all sides by people who really, really like Christmas. So, I reduce my field of view to them and gifts (I’ve got a lotta child in me yet) to the exclusion of lame decorations and whatnot.

Anyway, it seems as though Christmas celebrations are getting better as I get older, even with a decrease in presents received. You know what that means? I’m maturing! (It’s nice to have confirmation of that every once and a while.)

I got a load of good stuff this year as well; I won’t waste your time on all the details because we both know you don’t care. So… Happy Monday everybody. Until next time!

10 thoughts on “Christmas ‘05”

  1. Rick,

    Well, well, well… there just maybe some hope for you yet. So let me get this straght, you wrote against Christians having
    Christmas trees in their home, female angels, Christmas in general, Churches that have Christmas programs, Santa in
    particular (Santa hanging from a tree!),for the past month and now we see that you enjoyed your Christmas and think Christmas
    celebrations are getting better as you get older. Yes you are maturing.

    It is entirely within the realm of biblical Christianity to
    celebrate Christmas which
    when done within a home that is decidely Christian, can include a Christmas tree with ornaments that speak of the birth
    of the Savior ect, to attend Church services with Christmas programs, and give gifts to one another and tie it all together
    with the thread of Christian love, which is embodied in the wonderous gift God the Father send to the world, in that God
    became flesh so that men can be saved from their sins. That’s what its all about. Celebrate that!

    {{{Candleman}}}

  2. PS… Do you know why when someone leaves a post on your blog the sentences keep going off the page to the right to where you can’t see what your writing for about 5-6 word and then it wrapped around to the second line?

    {{{Candleman}}}

  3. Candleman, no, there is not hope for me yet. I still think the entire thing is pagan and ridiculous, hence why I had my “blinders” on while enjoying the things which were biblical–the giving of gifts, the fellowship of family and friends, expressions of love, etc.

    The day of “Christmas” itself is a perversion of a pagan holiday, “recreated” by the Roman Catholic Church. That Protestants celebrate it at all is insane. And it isn’t just me; the greatest preachers of the past have spoken out against it as well, such as Spurgeon (who I quoted in a previous post).

    You cannot worship God in spirit and in truth if the truth you’re using has as its foundation lies. So yes, any church which acknowledged and celebrated Christmas in any way did *not* worship God in the slightest if “in spirit and in truth” is true. You cannot have it both ways. God is not a God of compromise, especially with pagan practices of old.

    So, no, I am not “maturing” to a lukewarm Christian belief system. Rather, I am enjoying Christmas celebrations more because as I get older I find it easier to ignore the superfluous satanism that everyone lauds while enjoying those things which aren’t wrong. Further, I am finding I am content with less stuff (which I never was when I was younger), and would be happy to not receive anything at all. Eliminate the gift-giving aspect, and Christmas would fade as simply a glorified family reunion in the name of Santa Claus.

    And seriously, you think Christmas has anything to do with Christ’s birth? Even the apostles didn’t even celebrate that, nor does the gospel (recounted in 1 Corinthians 15 as the death, burial and resurrection of Christ) include the birth! The world would rather their God be a baby than a conquering, sword-wielding, serve-Him-or-die Lord and Savior. And Christians haplessly follow suit and celebrate with the biggest celebration of the year part of Christ’s life which is unassuming, unthreatening, and altogether “nice.” Why not create a holiday around the fact that He will have killed millions who will not accept His rule? Why not create a holiday in anticipation of His coming with His saints to conquer? Why not create a holiday to celebrate His perserverance in resisting Satan?

    Why the birth? And why on a day chosen by the pagan branch of Christendom?

    Christmas does not make sense. If you call it biblical, then your understanding of the Bible is sorely lacking.

  4. Candleman, no, there is not hope for me yet. I still think the entire thing is pagan and ridiculous, hence why I had my “blinders” on while enjoying the things which were biblical–the giving of gifts, the fellowship of family and friends, expressions of love, etc.

    The day of “Christmas” itself is a perversion of a pagan holiday, “recreated” by the Roman Catholic Church. That Protestants celebrate it at all is insane. And it isn’t just me; the greatest preachers of the past have spoken out against it as well, such as Spurgeon (who I quoted in a previous post).

    You cannot worship God in spirit and in truth if the truth you’re using has as its foundation lies. So yes, any church which acknowledged and celebrated Christmas in any way did *not* worship God in the slightest if “in spirit and in truth” is true. You cannot have it both ways. God is not a God of compromise, especially with pagan practices of old.

    So, no, I am not “maturing” to a lukewarm Christian belief system. Rather, I am enjoying Christmas celebrations more because as I get older I find it easier to ignore the superfluous satanism that everyone lauds while enjoying those things which aren’t wrong. Further, I am finding I am content with less stuff (which I never was when I was younger), and would be happy to not receive anything at all. Eliminate the gift-giving aspect, and Christmas would fade as simply a glorified family reunion in the name of Santa Claus.

    And seriously, you think Christmas has anything to do with Christ’s birth? Even the apostles didn’t even celebrate that, nor does the gospel (recounted in 1 Corinthians 15 as the death, burial and resurrection of Christ) include the birth! The world would rather their God be a baby than a conquering, sword-wielding, serve-Him-or-die Lord and Savior. And Christians haplessly follow suit and celebrate with the biggest celebration of the year part of Christ’s life which is unassuming, unthreatening, and altogether “nice.” Why not create a holiday around the fact that He will have killed millions who will not accept His rule? Why not create a holiday in anticipation of His coming with His saints to conquer? Why not create a holiday to celebrate His perserverance in resisting Satan?

    Why the birth? And why on a day chosen by the pagan branch of Christendom?

    Christmas does not make sense. If you call it biblical, then your understanding of the Bible is sorely lacking.

  5. You say: “So yes, any church which acknowledged and celebrated Christmas in any way did *not* worship God in the slightest if “in spirit and in truthâ€? is true.”

    What do you define as a church that is celebrating Christmas? A Christmas Eve service? Singing Christmas Hymns? Reading of the birth story? A Christmas tree in the sanctuary? The preaching of Luke 1 & 2???

    {{{Candleman}}}

  6. No, nothing wrong with preaching the whole counsel of God, including the birth account. I do find it odd that churches allow the world system to determine when sermons are to be preached (i.e., resurrection accounts on the pagan fest of Ishtar, birth accounts on the pagan fest of winter, etc.).

    Frankly, I would think that the best thing to preach during anytime when a large group of “non-regulars” would be attending would be the simple gospel and salvation thereby. As has been pointed out, the gospel does not include the birth; it includes our sin and the fact that Jesus died, was buried, and rose again to provide salvation for us.

    At least the Ishtar theme encompasses a third of the primary points which constitute the gospel of Jesus Christ.

    Anyway…

    I am not saying people cannot celebrate or hold as special any day they choose. People are within their liberty to do so.

    However, not all things are expedient, and to celebrate pagan festivals using pagan traditions created by the pagan Roman Catholic Church, it is impossible to worship God, for the worship is not done *in truth.*

  7. No, nothing wrong with preaching the whole counsel of God, including the birth account. I do find it odd that churches allow the world system to determine when sermons are to be preached (i.e., resurrection accounts on the pagan fest of Ishtar, birth accounts on the pagan fest of winter, etc.).

    Frankly, I would think that the best thing to preach during anytime when a large group of “non-regulars” would be attending would be the simple gospel and salvation thereby. As has been pointed out, the gospel does not include the birth; it includes our sin and the fact that Jesus died, was buried, and rose again to provide salvation for us.

    At least the Ishtar theme encompasses a third of the primary points which constitute the gospel of Jesus Christ.

    Anyway…

    I am not saying people cannot celebrate or hold as special any day they choose. People are within their liberty to do so.

    However, not all things are expedient, and to celebrate pagan festivals using pagan traditions created by the pagan Roman Catholic Church, it is impossible to worship God, for the worship is not done *in truth.*

  8. Rick,

    I really don’t understand your fascination with finding distant pagan festivals from centuries ago, and equating that to Christians who celebrate Christmas in the 2nd millennium. You seem to take hold of anything that comes out of the RC church, and state that any church that remotely practices any such thing is apostate or not worshiping God in truth.

    Does your church have communion? So does the RC church. Is it insane that any Protestant Church hold communion? I have been at various RC churches for funerals ect, and refused to participate in a communion service there because I do not hold to their view whatsoever that the bread and cup become the actual body and blood of Christ. But I still participate in communion at my church or another church that would teach what I believe it to be.

    Likewise, I really don’t care what some ancient pagan custom you can dig up that held some hedonistic festival in the last month of the year and equate that to a celebration of the Incarnation of Christ via the Virgin Birth, Emmanuel, God with us. I care about how my wife and I and the church we attend choose to celebrate it. With the reading of Luke 1 & 2, joining together is the singing of Christmas Hymns and Songs that speak of the birth of Christ. About the preaching of the Word and yes, the presentation of the Gospel. And your assertion that the Gospel does not included the birth of Christ is ridiculous, that’s were the Gospel begins. It is just your hatred of anything Christmas that would make you say such a thing.

    Lastly, my Christianity is neither lukewarm, satanic nor is my understanding of the Bible “sorely lackingâ€? because the church I worship at celebrates Christmas as we do as a family within our home. For you to suggest such is really silly.
    {{{Candleman}}}

  9. I really don’t understand your fascination with finding distant pagan festivals from centuries ago, and equating that to Christians who celebrate Christmas in the 2nd millennium.

    It’s not a matter of “finding them.” It’s common knowledge. Other holidays, such as Halloween, came about the same way: a supposed Christening of pagan festivals by the Roman Catholic Church to ease the conversion of the pagans.

    You seem to take hold of anything that comes out of the RC church, and state that any church that remotely practices any such thing is apostate or not worshiping God in truth.

    The Roman Catholic Church is knee deep (if not deeper) in appropriated pagan festivals, rituals, etc. It also, for some reason, clings to outdated Jewish worship as well (priests, the sacrifice of the mass, etc.).

    Does your church have communion? So does the RC church. Is it insane that any Protestant Church hold communion?

    The Roman Catholic Church has a mass, which is like a communion only more satanic in nature (i.e., cannibalism, repeated sacrifice, etc.). The Bible instituted the observance of the Lord’s Supper (or, Communion) for the remembrance of His sacrifice. So, any church that practices it is doing so according to the Scriptures, not the RCC. (Although, I suppose it is within a church’s right to mess it up by mixing it with tradition and such.)

    I have been at various RC churches for funerals ect, and refused to participate in a communion service there because I do not hold to their view whatsoever that the bread and cup become the actual body and blood of Christ. But I still participate in communion at my church or another church that would teach what I believe it to be.

    Then we’re in agreement there. :)

    Likewise, I really don’t care what some ancient pagan custom you can dig up that held some hedonistic festival in the last month of the year and equate that to a celebration of the Incarnation of Christ via the Virgin Birth, Emmanuel, God with us.

    Why celebrate it in December? No one did until the RCC decided to say “Oh sure, just supplant this pagan feast with our Mass, and all is well.” Protestants eventually eagerly took this tradition upon themselves as well, but there were voices which cried out against it, such as Spurgeon or (more recently) James Knox and David Cloud.

    It’s probably really easy to call me crazy for calling Christmas pagan; would it be just as easy to tell Spurgeon that? Just wondering.

    I care about how my wife and I and the church we attend choose to celebrate it. With the reading of Luke 1 & 2, joining together is the singing of Christmas Hymns and Songs that speak of the birth of Christ. About the preaching of the Word and yes, the presentation of the Gospel. And your assertion that the Gospel does not included the birth of Christ is ridiculous, that’s were the Gospel begins. It is just your hatred of anything Christmas that would make you say such a thing.

    According to Paul, there are three essentials to the Gospel: the death, burial, and resurrection. Show me where the birth is included.

    And yes, I realize that one of the four Gospels begins, “the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ…” That same Gospel just happens to *not* include the account of His birth as well. Amazing coincidence, to say the least. The birth was important to the Jews because the genealogy of the Messiah was of upmost importance. However, in the “less Jewish” Gospels of Mark and John, we do not have a birth account because the Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ has existed for all eternity, and that is what is emphasized in John.

  10. I really don’t understand your fascination with finding distant pagan festivals from centuries ago, and equating that to Christians who celebrate Christmas in the 2nd millennium.

    It’s not a matter of “finding them.” It’s common knowledge. Other holidays, such as Halloween, came about the same way: a supposed Christening of pagan festivals by the Roman Catholic Church to ease the conversion of the pagans.

    You seem to take hold of anything that comes out of the RC church, and state that any church that remotely practices any such thing is apostate or not worshiping God in truth.

    The Roman Catholic Church is knee deep (if not deeper) in appropriated pagan festivals, rituals, etc. It also, for some reason, clings to outdated Jewish worship as well (priests, the sacrifice of the mass, etc.).

    Does your church have communion? So does the RC church. Is it insane that any Protestant Church hold communion?

    The Roman Catholic Church has a mass, which is like a communion only more satanic in nature (i.e., cannibalism, repeated sacrifice, etc.). The Bible instituted the observance of the Lord’s Supper (or, Communion) for the remembrance of His sacrifice. So, any church that practices it is doing so according to the Scriptures, not the RCC. (Although, I suppose it is within a church’s right to mess it up by mixing it with tradition and such.)

    I have been at various RC churches for funerals ect, and refused to participate in a communion service there because I do not hold to their view whatsoever that the bread and cup become the actual body and blood of Christ. But I still participate in communion at my church or another church that would teach what I believe it to be.

    Then we’re in agreement there. :)

    Likewise, I really don’t care what some ancient pagan custom you can dig up that held some hedonistic festival in the last month of the year and equate that to a celebration of the Incarnation of Christ via the Virgin Birth, Emmanuel, God with us.

    Why celebrate it in December? No one did until the RCC decided to say “Oh sure, just supplant this pagan feast with our Mass, and all is well.” Protestants eventually eagerly took this tradition upon themselves as well, but there were voices which cried out against it, such as Spurgeon or (more recently) James Knox and David Cloud.

    It’s probably really easy to call me crazy for calling Christmas pagan; would it be just as easy to tell Spurgeon that? Just wondering.

    I care about how my wife and I and the church we attend choose to celebrate it. With the reading of Luke 1 & 2, joining together is the singing of Christmas Hymns and Songs that speak of the birth of Christ. About the preaching of the Word and yes, the presentation of the Gospel. And your assertion that the Gospel does not included the birth of Christ is ridiculous, that’s were the Gospel begins. It is just your hatred of anything Christmas that would make you say such a thing.

    According to Paul, there are three essentials to the Gospel: the death, burial, and resurrection. Show me where the birth is included.

    And yes, I realize that one of the four Gospels begins, “the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ…” That same Gospel just happens to *not* include the account of His birth as well. Amazing coincidence, to say the least. The birth was important to the Jews because the genealogy of the Messiah was of upmost importance. However, in the “less Jewish” Gospels of Mark and John, we do not have a birth account because the Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ has existed for all eternity, and that is what is emphasized in John.

Leave a Reply to Rick Beckman Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Use your Gravatar-enabled email address while commenting to automatically enhance your comment with some of Gravatar's open profile data.

Comments must be made in accordance with the comment policy. This site uses Akismet to reduce spam; learn how your comment data is processed.

You may use Markdown to format your comments; additionally, these HTML tags and attributes may be used: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

the Rick Beckman archive
Scroll to Top