John Stewart attacks Christmas and the Peanuts

[Brian4Liberty]

A very interesting segment on the Daily Show yesterday. For those in the know, it was very clever. Resurrecting a somewhat hidden battle for Christmas fought on children's television in 1964 and 1966.

1964 was the year that "Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer" premiered. A secular Christmas story, with no mention of the religious aspect of Christmas (but it did feature a short morality story-line about discrimination, through the analogy of misfit toys, and a song about silver and gold).

1965 was the year that Charles Schulz was able to make a statement about the secularization and commercialization of Christmas through his Charlie Brown Christmas. It almost didn't happen, as some people didn't want it to happen.

1966 followed with another new secular Christmas special, The Grinch Who Stole Christmas.

On a Charlie Brown Christmas:


The story touches on the over-commercialization and secularism of Christmas, and serves to remind viewers of the true meaning of Christmas: the birth of Jesus Christ
...
Network executives were not at all keen on several aspects of the show, forcing Schulz and Melendez to wage some serious battles to preserve their vision. The executives did not want to have Linus reciting the story of the birth of Christ from the Gospel of Luke;[1] the network orthodoxy of the time assumed that viewers would not want to sit through passages of the King James Version of the Bible. A story reported on the Whoopi Goldberg-hosted version of the making of the program (see below) that Charles Schulz was adamant about keeping this scene in, remarking that "If we don't tell the true meaning of Christmas, who will?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Charlie_Brown_Christmas

And here is the Daily Show segment. Making fun of those who oppose the changing nature of the Christmas Holiday (to non-religious and even non-Christmas), and at the same time utilizing cartoons that were a big part of the propaganda campaign to secularize Christmas in the first place.

They took special aim at Charles Schulz's Peanuts, which may have been the only childrens special that actually mentioned the religion of Christianity. There was a bit of a demonization of Peanuts, using Linus as the bad guy, and having Lucy use the racial slur "Jew".

All in all, a very clever satire, on multiple levels, although one would have to interpret this as just another attack on Christmas at all levels:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-december-6-2010/the-gretch-who-saved-the-war-on-christmas

[ChaosControl]

I'm going to side with peanuts, even though I'm not religious, Christmas is way too commercialized, it is disgusting.

[Stary Hickory]

Gee I find myself not caring what John Stewart says really. I look at that dumb ass and try to figure out if the wheels are actually turning inside his head or not. When he looks at me I think of brainless fish in a fish tank to stupid to understand where he is.

Attacks on Christians that is so /yawn

[Romantarchist]

Hi, I'm Jon Stewart. I can say whatever mean, derogatory things I want about the people who want to keep Christ in Christmas because I'm Jewish and if someone criticizes me I can just call them an anti-Semite or a Holocaust denier. Oh, and don't pay any attention to that Rick Sanchez incident from a couple months back.

[oyarde]

Ok , I will play along , what is stewarts point or does he have one ?

[Brian4Liberty]

Ok , I will play along , what is stewarts point or does he have one ?

Fox News bad. Peanuts bad. Religious Christmas bad. Yiddish good.

[dannno]

Gee I find myself not caring what John Stewart says really. I look at that dumb ass and try to figure out if the wheels are actually turning inside his head or not. When he looks at me I think of brainless fish in a fish tank to stupid to understand where he is.

Attacks on Christians that is so /yawn

LOL, you saw that as attacking Christianity?? Really??



Ok , I will play along , what is stewarts point or does he have one ?

His point was that even though Christmas is the dominant cultural event, many Christians become very un-Christian during the holiday season and defend a bunch of stuff that really has nothing to do with Christianity, and they do it in a mean spirited way.

[zade]

I liked it...

[Flash]

Gee I find myself not caring what John Stewart says really. I look at that dumb ass and try to figure out if the wheels are actually turning inside his head or not. When he looks at me I think of brainless fish in a fish tank to stupid to understand where he is.

Attacks on Christians that is so /yawn

Yeah I don't understand Jon Stewart's appeal. The first season of his show were funny and original but then it started getting stale. Same exact thing happened with Colbert.

[YumYum]

Ok , I will play along , what is stewarts point or does he have one ?

People who don't want it to be exclusively a Christian holiday would prefer people to say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas".

Christians must remember that Christians took a pagan holiday and made it a Christian holiday. So, there should be some respect shown to the pagans.

[Depressed Liberator]

Uh, did any of you actually watch it? His argument the whole damn time was basically people keep overreacting about things being too PC and Christmas and Christianity being taken away from them, when it's not being threatened at all.

[Flash]

And by the way, I probably agree with Jon Stewart here more than anything. Although I can't watch videos on this computer, I'm guessing his bit had something to do with secularism. Christmas started off as a pagan holiday, which celebrate life, hence the tree being brought into the house. I see Christmas as having secular values. Selflessness, peace, and goodwill are values that all religions (and atheists) can get behind.

[Batman]

Yeah Stewart thinks he's funny but he really isn't. His satire amounts to blatant propaganda and paper-thin jokes.

[moostraks]

Christians must remember that Christians took a pagan holiday and made it a Christian holiday. So, there should be some respect shown to the pagans.

very true...Many are ignorant of its history and then protest being persecuted. It is sad because it only shows the lack of depth of understanding of the history of their own religion.

Having watched the video it wasn't too obnoxious until the last minute or so where he (as usual) drug the skit a bit too far and ended up refuting his own point to an extent. I say Happy Holidays, because Christmas is the 25th (therefore any day prior to that is the holiday season) and it is not my problem to diagnosis ones faith or my business for that matter. The whole season has gotten extended so far and so commercialized that I loathe from late September onwards feeling like I am being suckered into lining the coffers of big business using a slick marketing scheme or I that I am short changing my children to prove a point.

[torchbearer]

I'm going to side with peanuts, even though I'm not religious, Christmas is way too commercialized, it is disgusting.

+1
I refuse to participate anymore. people think i'm just a scrooge, i just explain i don't feel compelled to participate in a commercial holiday.

[torchbearer]

very true...Many are ignorant of its history and then protest being persecuted. It is sad because it only shows the lack of depth of understanding of the history of their own religion.

the original day in rome was saturnalia, same traditions of celebration and gift giving. they just changed the name. people didn't celebrate the birth of jesus just because they changed the name. they kept the festival of gift giving and excess alive. it was a winter festival, many cultures had one.

[acptulsa]

I like Charles Schultz' work and hope Stewart doesn't turn anyone off of this or anything else that can aid them in developing their humanity.

That said, Chuck Jones rocks and The Grinch rules!

[torchbearer]

the modern idea of santa came from an adverisement for coca cola.

[ChaosControl]

+1
I refuse to participate anymore. people think i'm just a scrooge, i just explain i don't feel compelled to participate in a commercial holiday.

Well I like the holiday, regardless of pagan or christian elements. I just hate the commercialization. I participate with the holiday, just not the commercial nonsense.

So spending time together with family and friends, playing games and all is great. But one shouldn't feel like they have to go out and buy gifts, if they really want to give though they make it something home made. A home made gift with effort put in is better than going down to walmart and buying someone a video game or movie. Why give someone something they can just as easily go down and get themselves?

When I start my own family, gift exchanges will be home made items only.

[torchbearer]

Well I like the holiday, regardless of pagan or christian elements. I just hate the commercialization. I participate with the holiday, just not the commercial nonsense.

So spending time together with family and friends, playing games and all is great. But one shouldn't feel like they have to go out and buy gifts, if they really want to give though they make it something home made. A home made gift with effort put in is better than going down to walmart and buying someone a video game or movie. Why give someone something they can just as easily go down and get themselves?

When I start my own family, gift exchanges will be home made items only.

Why not christmas everyday?
is it really that much work to be nice to people?
i tell my women- 'for you, it is christmas everyday'
probably will end up using that in a song.

[moostraks]

the original day in rome was saturnalia, same traditions of celebration and gift giving. they just changed the name. people didn't celebrate the birth of jesus just because they changed the name. they kept the festival of gift giving and excess alive. it was a winter festival, many cultures had one.

Torch I am talking about modern christians participation in the holiday on the 25th of December.

[ChaosControl]

Why not christmas everyday?
is it really that much work to be nice to people?
i tell my women- 'for you, it is christmas everyday'
probably will end up using that in a song.

That is fine too, but a special celebration is nice too.

[WilliamShrugged]

Well I like the holiday, regardless of pagan or christian elements. I just hate the commercialization. I participate with the holiday, just not the commercial nonsense.

So spending time together with family and friends, playing games and all is great. But one shouldn't feel like they have to go out and buy gifts, if they really want to give though they make it something home made. A home made gift with effort put in is better than going down to walmart and buying someone a video game or movie. Why give someone something they can just as easily go down and get themselves?

When I start my own family, gift exchanges will be home made items only.


Depends on the movie..;)

[Todd]

Gunny posted a pretty good thread on the pagan origins of Christmas several years back.

it is over commercialized....but I tend to tone down those overtones and try to celebrate the more spiritual aspects

[torchbearer]

Torch I am talking about modern christians participation in the holiday on the 25th of December.

i know. but the day is just called christmas. the rituals we practice each year are not a creation of christmas. we practice pagan rituals at christmas and easter.

[Stary Hickory]

Uh, did any of you actually watch it? His argument the whole damn time was basically people keep overreacting about things being too PC and Christmas and Christianity being taken away from them, when it's not being threatened at all.

Then he will be the first to shut his mouth about it and quit worrying about what Christians do or do not do. Or how they think. I mean WTF? Really? If he really felt this way he would not even bring it up and "ridicule" or "satire" people on his show. Peoples beliefs are their own personal business and if the feel strongly about them so be it.

I could care less what Stewart thinks on this matter. I think he is a freaking moron.

[Pauls' Revere]

Just watched Charlie Brown Christmas. Saw nothing bad about it at all. Reminds people that commercialization and materialism is not everything. You dont need to have, to have it all.

[BenIsForRon]

Then he will be the first to shut his mouth about it and quit worrying about what Christians do or do not do. Or how they think. I mean WTF? Really? If he really felt this way he would not even bring it up and "ridicule" or "satire" people on his show. Peoples beliefs are their own personal business and if the feel strongly about them so be it.

I could care less what Stewart thinks on this matter. I think he is a freaking moron.

Did you even watch the skit? He was just making fun of the people who think there is a war on christmas. He wasn't making fun of christians.

I swear, some people here are so biased that they've made up their mind about something before they've seen it.

For example, here is what was probably going through Star Hickory's head:


Jon Stewart is talking about Christmas... he's overdubbing the peanuts cartoon... OMG he hates christians!!!!11!!!11!!

[Kludge]

//

[speciallyblend]

People who don't want it to be exclusively a Christian holiday would prefer people to say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas".

Christians must remember that Christians took a pagan holiday and made it a Christian holiday. So, there should be some respect shown to the pagans.

I am no bible thumper but i refuse to say happy holidays and anyone that says it to me will get a merry christmas from me;)

[dannno]

I am no bible thumper but i refuse to say happy holidays and anyone that says it to me will get a merry christmas from me;)

What, just a "Merry Christmas"?? No frosty nugs :confused:

[libertarian4321]

I am no bible thumper but i refuse to say happy holidays and anyone that says it to me will get a merry christmas from me;)

I try and remember to say "Happy Holidays." Normal people aren't offended by "Happy Holidays" and only the extreme right wing Christians d-bags get upset over it (which amuses me), so it works for me, lol.

Of course, if you want to cause cardiac arrest in one of the judgmental right wing religious extremists, respond to their "Merry Christmas" with "and a Happy Kwanza to you." Then grab some pop corn and a drink and watch the fun.

[YumYum]

I try and remember to say "Happy Holidays." Normal people aren't offended by "Happy Holidays" and only the extreme right wing Christians d-bags get upset over it (which amuses me), so it works for me, lol.

"d-bags" means "douche bags". A "douche bag" is a bag that contains solution that women insert using a douche stick into their private parts to clean out last night's left overs. If you call a Christian a "douche bag" you will be visited by jmdrake and nate immediately. Repent.

[KurtBoyer25L]

Peanuts is awesome and I think rather than simply telling a story about the Bible or Jesus, it reminds people of heartfelt morals and communal spirituality. It is a wonderful Christian story (or a story about Christian kids/people) but its broader moral is that something real (faith/charity/the small unhealthy tree) is better than something fake (commercialization and competition for prizes/social status) no matter how puny-seeming the former & how sparkling the latter.

Sometimes there's an inherent compliment, an admission of quality & classic status in choosing the raw material they use on satire shows like the Daily. He's not doing riffs on those bad Garfield cartoons they put out after Jim Davis moved on. I'm sure Jon isn't silly enough not to dig the Peanuts Christmas (possibly the greatest cartoon ever of its type).

Rudolph the RNR is a beautiful but strange little work, with massive plot holes, a football-scout jerk for a Santa, and a dark side in general. But it's not anti-Christmas or pro-commercial. "Silver and Gold" is an inspired, memorable folk song sung by the great Burl Ives, and it has a thoughtful emotional message. It's not saying "money is great, you should get some!" Notice the "comic relief" in the miner's greedy, spontaneous pick ax in the snow & subsequent disappointment. When Rudolph rolls his eyes, it's telling the kids in the audience "see, being greedy is ridiculous."

Finally, the next time we're all feasting, lighting candles (Christmas lights), and worshiping an evergreen tree on the winter solistice, consider whether Yule simply got itself co-opted in lieu of Christmas being an original idea to celebrate a birthday. Secular cartoons may be a way for writers to stand the test of time with universal messages, while the religions fight about who the season belongs to.

[YumYum]

I enjoy this post Kurt, but I have to tell you. If I was visited by my Lord and Savior and told that I was going to spend eternity in Heaven drinking the best wine ever made, I can reassure you that I wouldn't give two shits about what pagans say about Christmas. Aren't Christians going to Heaven, or did that all change?

[BlackTerrel]

I try and remember to say "Happy Holidays." Normal people aren't offended by "Happy Holidays" and only the extreme right wing Christians d-bags get upset over it (which amuses me), so it works for me, lol.

There is nothing offensive about "Happy Holidays" or "Merry Christmas". Or for that matter "Happy Hannukah" or "Happy Kwanzaa". The idiots that get offended by any and all of these need to chill the fuck out.

[JohnEngland]

The interesting thing is that when secularists want to celebrate Christmas (Christ's Mass) without refering to Christianity, they use the phrase "Happy Holidays" (Holy Day).

To which I then have to ask, which Holy Day are they celebrating? :p

So, as a Christian, I have no problem with secularists saying "Happy Holidays" as it's essentially saying the same thing - celebrating Christ's birth.

Maybe the neo-secularists will some day catch on to this and start calling it something else, like "Happy Winter Day" - at which point the whole celebration will have become meaningless to anyone other than Christians.

[YumYum]

Thank-you...good points!

[Bman]

The interesting thing is that when secularists want to celebrate Christmas (Christ's Mass) without refering to Christianity, they use the phrase "Happy Holidays" (Holy Day).

To which I then have to ask, which Holy Day are they celebrating? :p

So, as a Christian, I have no problem with secularists saying "Happy Holidays" as it's essentially saying the same thing - celebrating Christ's birth.

Maybe the neo-secularists will some day catch on to this and start calling it something else, like "Happy Winter Day" - at which point the whole celebration will have become meaningless to anyone other than Christians.

People have been celebrating this time of year far before Christ. Although those reasons have lost all meaning in current times. Traditions, especially ones dating thousands of years are hard to break even if the meaning has changed or has lost it's original meaning.

[Kludge]

The interesting thing is that when secularists want to celebrate Christmas (Christ's Mass) without refering to Christianity, they use the phrase "Happy Holidays" (Holy Day).

To which I then have to ask, which Holy Day are they celebrating? :p

So, as a Christian, I have no problem with secularists saying "Happy Holidays" as it's essentially saying the same thing - celebrating Christ's birth.

Maybe the neo-secularists will some day catch on to this and start calling it something else, like "Happy Winter Day" - at which point the whole celebration will have become meaningless to anyone other than Christians.

Isn't "happy holidays" said to avoid conflicts over the competing religions' holidays around the same time?

At any rate, my mom was an involved Christian, but Christmas never had anything to do with the birth of Christ. At best, it was an excuse for a family get-together.

[GunnyFreedom]

Meh, I am a strong and passionate believer myself, and I believe that Christmas is one of the ways that Christianity went horribly, horribly wrong. And I don't even mean the commercialization of Christmas, I mean Christmas itself, from the beginning of it. Christmas and Easter both are little more than Christologic adulterations of pagan festivals. The vast majority of actual practices performed during Christmas and Easter are straight from pre-Christian pagan Europe. If you want to celebrate pagan festivals, that's perfectly fine -- whether you are a Christian or not -- just don't bow to idolatry if you are a Christian and you should be OK. But for goodness sakes don't call it "christian." It's the furthest thing from it.

I refuse to participate in Christmas and Easter so long as there remains an effort to call them Christian. They are in fact everything but. I'd be a lot more willing to accept Christmas and Easter into my home if they didn't pretend to be Christian. At the end of the day, Christian pretense is far, far more dangerous than open anti-christian sentiment, IMHO.

[JohnEngland]

People have been celebrating this time of year far before Christ. Although those reasons have lost all meaning in current times. Traditions, especially ones dating thousands of years are hard to break even if the meaning has changed or has lost it's original meaning.

Indeed. However, referring to it as a holiday, which means Holy Day, implies a Christian celebration - even if they don't mean it.

An interesting side note, I've noticed that when Americans refer to the time when they take a break from their work to rest and relax, they tend to call it a "vacation". However, British people tend to call it a "holiday". Clearly British people are misusing the word Holiday, and Vacation would be far more appropriate.

Likewise, for those who want to celebrate the time we call Christmas but have nothing to do with it, it would be more accurate for them not to refer to it as a holiday.

Thus, for secularists, perhaps instead of saying "Happy Christmas!" or "Happy Holidays!", they should say "Happy Winter Vacation!"

[JohnEngland]

I refuse to participate in Christmas and Easter so long as there remains an effort to call them Christian. They are in fact everything but. I'd be a lot more willing to accept Christmas and Easter into my home if they didn't pretend to be Christian. At the end of the day, Christian pretense is far, far more dangerous than open anti-christian sentiment, IMHO.

Well, Christmas and Easter ARE Christian celebrations. However, that doesn't deny others from celebrating pagan festivals on the same day.

[YumYum]

Meh, I am a strong and passionate believer myself, and I believe that Christmas is one of the ways that Christianity went horribly, horribly wrong. And I don't even mean the commercialization of Christmas, I mean Christmas itself, from the beginning of it. Christmas and Easter both are little more than Christologic adulterations of pagan festivals. The vast majority of actual practices performed during Christmas and Easter are straight from pre-Christian pagan Europe. If you want to celebrate pagan festivals, that's perfectly fine -- whether you are a Christian or not -- just don't bow to idolatry if you are a Christian and you should be OK. But for goodness sakes don't call it "christian." It's the furthest thing from it.

I refuse to participate in Christmas and Easter so long as there remains an effort to call them Christian. They are in fact everything but. I'd be a lot more willing to accept Christmas and Easter into my home if they didn't pretend to be Christian. At the end of the day, Christian pretense is far, far more dangerous than open anti-christian sentiment, IMHO.

Thank you for your in-put Gunny. Do you partake of the wine and bread, which Christ commanded us to do?

[Kludge]

Indeed. However, referring to it as a holiday, which means Holy Day, implies a Christian celebration - even if they don't mean it.

Are you being serious? Hanukkah, Hajj, Bodhi Day are all holy days in December. "Happy holidays" isn't just so non-Christians don't offend Christians.

[GunnyFreedom]

Well, Christmas and Easter ARE Christian celebrations. However, that doesn't deny others from celebrating pagan festivals on the same day.

Since when?

[GunnyFreedom]

Thank you for your in-put Gunny. Do you partake of the wine and bread, which Christ commanded us to do?

Yes I do, I keep all seven biblical feasts, to include Unleavened Bread, Passover, and Bikkurim. The 4 cups of wine, and broken unleavened bread are a part of the Passover celebration which Christ commanded us to observe.

[Brian4Liberty]

There is nothing offensive about "Happy Holidays" or "Merry Christmas". Or for that matter "Happy Hannukah" or "Happy Kwanzaa". The idiots that get offended by any and all of these need to chill the fuck out.

In the John Stewart piece, he started out by focusing on a Fox News host who was questioning why a city changed the name of their long-standing annual "Christmas Parade" to the "Holiday Parade". It wasn't about being offended at "Happy Holiday", but at removing "Christmas" altogether.

Perhaps if it were a different culture and country, the "discontent" would be more understandable. Let's say there is a tropical island nation which celebrates both a religious and secular holiday called "Festivus". They honor the day that their God created their island, and they have a festival and sing around a great pile of coconuts. They eat the coconuts, throw the shells into a pile, and then have a cleansing fire ceremony.

Someone immigrates to The Island, and says, hey I have a tradition around this time too. Every year at Festivus time, a fat guy in a red suit brings gifts to all the children. It's for the kids, so in reality we just buy stuff for the kids, and it helps the economy! Most of the people on the island go along, until Santa Claus is part of the Festivus Holiday. Next, we tell them a story every year about a Festivus tree, and a red nosed reindeer that dances around it. We play down the whole creation of the Island nonsense, and the coconut part. Next, we sue to have coconut piles removed from shared "public" spaces, as everyone is not into coconuts. After that is accomplished, we change the name of the annual Festivus feast to the "Holiday" Feast. Hey, if you backwards natives still want to celebrate Festivus, coconuts and your ridiculous Island God, then you are free to do it in private. The next thing you know, John Stewart is doing a satire making fun of the Islanders that say, "hey, this was a FESTIVUS Holiday, we don't want to change the name, and many of us still celebrate with coconuts". To which John Stewart says "you guys are all uptight and racist."

[ARealConservative]

war on Christmas? more like a war on religion.

religious institutions are in direct competition with the progressive view of government being the entity that protects us from economic strife.

Even this atheist gets that part of it. Free Will is the enemy of progressives, and church driven charity requires free will, not force.

So if you are waging a war with religion, you certainly have your sights set on the largest religious holiday in the world.

[BlackTerrel]

In the John Stewart piece, he started out by focusing on a Fox News host who was questioning why a city changed the name of their long-standing annual "Christmas Parade" to the "Holiday Parade". It wasn't about being offended at "Happy Holiday", but at removing "Christmas" altogether.

Was the FoxNews host questioning it or was he being righteously outraged. There is a difference. I don't care if they call it a Christmas Parade or strive to be more inclusive and call it a Holiday Parade. Same difference and it's their choice. It's the people who are over the top outraged on both sides that annoy me.

The idiot Christians who get offended by "Happy Holidays" are just as bad as the idiot Jews, Muslims, atheists etc. who get offended by "Merry Christmas". Everyone chill the fuck out and the world will be a better place.

[Brian4Liberty]

Was the FoxNews host questioning it or was he being righteously outraged. There is a difference. I don't care if they call it a Christmas Parade or strive to be more inclusive and call it a Holiday Parade. Same difference and it's their choice. It's the people who are over the top outraged on both sides that annoy me.

The idiot Christians who get offended by "Happy Holidays" are just as bad as the idiot Jews, Muslims, atheists etc. who get offended by "Merry Christmas". Everyone chill the fuck out and the world will be a better place.

Yep, extremism really is a vice in most circumstances. ;)

She was being a little outraged. Watch the video.

The problem here is "forcing" (influencing, pushing, lawsuits) changes to the Christmas Holiday, yet not any other ones.

Should a St. Patrick's Day Parade be changed to the "Get Drunk on Green Beer Day" Parade or the "March Holiday" Parade because some group doesn't believe in Catholic saints, or isn't Irish and doesn't want to be left out?

[TER]

Meh, I am a strong and passionate believer myself, and I believe that Christmas is one of the ways that Christianity went horribly, horribly wrong. And I don't even mean the commercialization of Christmas, I mean Christmas itself, from the beginning of it. Christmas and Easter both are little more than Christologic adulterations of pagan festivals. The vast majority of actual practices performed during Christmas and Easter are straight from pre-Christian pagan Europe. If you want to celebrate pagan festivals, that's perfectly fine -- whether you are a Christian or not -- just don't bow to idolatry if you are a Christian and you should be OK. But for goodness sakes don't call it "christian." It's the furthest thing from it.

Christ is the Logos of God. He is the Reason of God. Christmas is not 'the adulterations of pagan festivals', rather it is the fulfillment of God's plan for all creation and us such does not merely elevate more ancient religious observances and celebrations, but rather reveals it for what it is, the endless human search for truth. The human struggle for the divine, the sacred, the eternal.

And that truth is the incarnate God, the Uncreated assuming creation, come as a baby, the son a virgin, in a cave in the desert, in the chill of the night, with a star as a celestial witness and an angelic choir proclaiming 'Glory to God in the Highest, and on earth peace, good will to man.'

The Lord Jesus Christ is the Truth, the Way and the Life. Far from it that truth is a 'what' or some abstract idea, like when Pontius Pilate asked the Lord 'What is truth?'. What he should have asked was 'Who is truth?' and then he might have understood and dropped to his knees and worshiped Him. Truth is not an abstract 'what', but a personal 'Who', and to those who live a life in Christ, all things will be revealed.

[zade]

In the John Stewart piece, he started out by focusing on a Fox News host who was questioning why a city changed the name of their long-standing annual "Christmas Parade" to the "Holiday Parade". It wasn't about being offended at "Happy Holiday", but at removing "Christmas" altogether.

Perhaps if it were a different culture and country, the "discontent" would be more understandable. Let's say there is a tropical island nation which celebrates both a religious and secular holiday called "Festivus". They honor the day that their God created their island, and they have a festival and sing around a great pile of coconuts. They eat the coconuts, throw the shells into a pile, and then have a cleansing fire ceremony.

Someone immigrates to The Island, and says, hey I have a tradition around this time too. Every year at Festivus time, a fat guy in a red suit brings gifts to all the children. It's for the kids, so in reality we just buy stuff for the kids, and it helps the economy! Most of the people on the island go along, until Santa Claus is part of the Festivus Holiday. Next, we tell them a story every year about a Festivus tree, and a red nosed reindeer that dances around it. We play down the whole creation of the Island nonsense, and the coconut part. Next, we sue to have coconut piles removed from shared "public" spaces, as everyone is not into coconuts. After that is accomplished, we change the name of the annual Festivus feast to the "Holiday" Feast. Hey, if you backwards natives still want to celebrate Festivus, coconuts and your ridiculous Island God, then you are free to do it in private. The next thing you know, John Stewart is doing a satire making fun of the Islanders that say, "hey, this was a FESTIVUS Holiday, we don't want to change the name, and many of us still celebrate with coconuts". To which John Stewart says "you guys are all uptight and racist."

Great, so just to be clear, you'd be in favor of bringing Native American religious ceremonies back to the forefront of religious celebration?

[Brian4Liberty]

Great, so just to be clear, you'd be in favor of bringing Native American religious ceremonies back to the forefront of religious celebration?

Why would I want to stop them from having their celebrations, or force them to change the names?

[GunnyFreedom]

Christ is the Logos of God. He is the Reason of God. Christmas is not 'the adulterations of pagan festivals', rather it is the fulfillment of God's plan for all creation and us such does not merely elevate more ancient religious observances and celebrations, but rather reveals it for what it is, the endless human search for truth. The human struggle for the divine, the sacred, the eternal.

And that truth is the incarnate God, the Uncreated assuming creation, come as a baby, the son a virgin, in a cave in the desert, in the chill of the night, with a star as a celestial witness and an angelic choir proclaiming 'Glory to God in the Highest, and on earth peace, good will to man.'

The Lord Jesus Christ is the Truth, the Way and the Life. Far from it that truth is a 'what' or some abstract idea, like when Pontius Pilate asked the Lord 'What is truth?'. What he should have asked was 'Who is truth?' and then he might have understood and dropped to his knees and worshiped Him. Truth is not an abstract 'what', but a personal 'Who', and to those who live a life in Christ, all things will be revealed.

So by calling an ancient pagan prosperity rite which offered sacrifices to pagan gods "christian" it suddenly becomes an integrally Christian Holy Day? Why is God Ok with that now when he was outraged with that throughout all of Biblical history? Has God changed somewhere?


ETA - Don't get me wrong, I'm not passing judgment here, you do what you want -- but don't sit there and tell me that the very thing that had angered God more than almost anything else in all of creation for 5000 years, is suddenly something that He very much wants us to do. There are even specific prohibitions against Christmas trees in the Old Testament. Jeremiah it is:

“Hear ye the word which the LORD speaketh unto you, O house of Israel: Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not. They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.” Jeremiah 10:1-5, KJV.

[TER]

So by calling an ancient pagan prosperity rite which offered sacrifices to pagan gods "christian" it suddenly becomes an integrally Christian Holy Day? Why is God Ok with that now when he was outraged with that throughout all of Biblical history? Has God changed somewhere?

A day was chosen for Christians to celebrate and commemorate the birth of Christ. The date chosen was on the winter soltice which was also the Roman holiday of the 'Birthday of the Unconquerable Sun'. This seemed fitting to the early saints of the Church and is still fitting today. What the Romans knew in part, the Christians know in full.

[TER]

ETA - Don't get me wrong, I'm not passing judgment here, you do what you want -- but don't sit there and tell me that the very thing that had angered God more than almost anything else in all of creation for 5000 years, is suddenly something that He very much wants us to do. There are even specific prohibitions against Christmas trees in the Old Testament. Jeremiah it is...


I think we have misunderstood eachother... :)

I am not referring to the traditions of Christmas trees and Santa Clause! These are recent innovations and have nothing to do with pagan winter solstice observances. I am referring to the yearly celebration in the Church calender commemorating this day. As God entered into time, likewise, time is made sacred, and in the calendar, a day is held to remember His awesome lovingkindness in the celebration of His Nativity.

While Jesus was born once 2000 years ago, for the Christian, He is born again every Feast of the Nativity, inspiring us to celebrate and glorify His Holy Name.

[GunnyFreedom]

I think we have misunderstood eachother... :)

I am not referring to the traditions of Christmas trees and Santa Clause! These are recent innovations and have nothing to do with pagan winter solstice observances. I am referring to the yearly celebration in the Church calender commemorating this day. As God entered into time, likewise, time is made sacred, and in the calendar, a day is held to remember His awesome lovingkindness in the festival celebrating His Nativity.

Perhaps you should study the history of the Yule, the traditions of the tree, gift exchanges, and the mysterious benefactor ala "santa claus' predate the advent of Christ.

"learn not the ways of the heathen" was not a suggestion, it was a command. Commands do not suddenly become irrelevant because we want them to.

Just because our grandfathers and our great great great grandfather did it this way does not make it right. The scriptures are replete with examples of how the body, on learning they were doing it wrong repented and started acting right.

Repentance is just not in the Church anymore, as far as I can see. People wonder why the Church is colapsing under it's own weight? It's because of the self imposed blinders that they have put on now that information about all of this is widely available.

Back when your average person had no hope in knowing the origins of Christmas and Easter, no freely available authoritative literature, and no trusted prophets around, I can see how God was forgiving and did not revoke His blessings upon the Church. Today the Church is losing His blessing and undertaking His cursings in part because of this willful desire to refuse to see what is right in front of our eyes.

Christmas and Easter are abominations. Judgment has been easy until now because there was no real way for people to understand why or how this was so. That excuse is no longer available, and as we can see God's blessing is departing the Church except for a very small remnant who refuse to blind themselves.

The holiday we now celebrate as "easter" was a PAGAN ORGY for goodness sakes! Prior to the advent of Christ, the pagans would get together to celebrate fertility rights, a giant rabbit would hide colored eggs symbolizing fertility, and people would gather together and exchange these eggs as invitations to get down and dirty in a sexual orgy.

Do you really think God wants the name of Christ associated with that abomination? I do not. I will not judge you for keeping these days - that is between you, your own conscience, and God - but do not try to convince me that these disgusting abominations are godly. I know better.

[TER]

Perhaps you should study the history of the Yule, the traditions of the tree, gift exchanges, and the mysterious benefactor ala "santa claus' predate the advent of Christ.

Christians are to fast for 40 days prior to the Nativity, seek confession for their sins, do acts of charity, pray unceasingly, and receive the Holy Eucharist on the Feast of the Nativity. This is how the Church should celebrate Christmas. The silly things you mentioned are not from the Church but are Western innovations.


"learn not the ways of the heathen" was not a suggestion, it was a command. Commands do not suddenly become irrelevant because we want them to.

Of course. Which is why the Church has continued her worship like God's chosen people, Israel, as He instructed them to. Which is why the yearly cycles of celebrations exist, why incense is burned, why psalms are sung, why vestements are worn, why fasts are observed and why sacramental services are held. This is the way the prophets of God worshiped, how they instructed His people to worship, and how the Church continues to do so this day.


Just because our grandfathers and our great great great grandfather did it this way does not make it right. The scriptures are replete with examples of how the body, on learning they were doing it wrong repented and started acting right.


Let me guess. This happened circa 1600 AD? That would mean there was no Church prior to then? That the Body of Christ was not present on the earth. Then Christ is made a liar because He promised that the gates of hell would never prevail over the Church. This idea that the Church was lost makes a mockery of the Holy Spirit and the Power of God.


Repentance is just not in the Church anymore, as far as I can see. People wonder why the Church is colapsing under it's own weight? It's because of the self imposed blinders that they have put on now that information about all of this is widely available.

The Church is collapsing? Which Church are you referring to? Because the Church has been attacked since the beginning and tried to be snuffed out for 2000 years by the most ruthless and powerful men and has survived intact, unceasing, and will do so until the Final Day. Did the Church collapse in Russia in the 20th century, when tens of millions of martyrs were killed? Not at all, in fact it was strengthened! and as always has been the historical paradox that is the Christian faith, by the blood of the martyrs the Church is strengthened, and by our weakness He is perfected.


Back when your average person had no hope in knowing the origins of Christmas and Easter, no freely available authoritative literature, and no trusted prophets around, I can see how God was forgiving and did not revoke His blessings upon the Church. Today the Church is losing His blessing and undertaking His cursings in part because of this willful desire to refuse to see what is right in front of our eyes.

Christmas and Easter are abominations. Judgment has been easy until now because there was no real way for people to understand why or how this was so. That excuse is no longer available, and as we can see God's blessing is departing the Church except for a very small remnant who refuse to blind themselves.

And point to me this very small remnant so that I may join them in worship? :D What if I told you this remnant is not that small!


The holiday we now celebrate as "easter" was a PAGAN ORGY for goodness sakes! Prior to the advent of Christ, the pagans would get together to celebrate fertility rights, a giant rabbit would hide colored eggs symbolizing fertility, and people would gather together and exchange these eggs as invitations to get down and dirty in a sexual orgy.

Do you really think God wants the name of Christ associated with that abomination? I do not. I will not judge you for keeping these days - that is between you, your own conscience, and God - but do not try to convince me that these disgusting abominations are godly. I know better.

Friend, I have no argument with you here. The things you have mentioned are Western corruptions of the Feast of Pascha. 'Easter' has always been known in the Church as Pascha, and is actually the word 'Passover' signifying the Lord's Passover from death to life and is the fulfillment of Israel's exodus and triumph over Egypt which represented death. There are still Christians who celebrate Pascha like the apostolic Church, sans the bunny rabbit and the eggs. I assure you the Church exists, though not easily identified in this Western culture of commercialism and relativism.

Shun the trees and bunny rabbits if they cause you scandal. They are not worth it! But celebrate the days we commemorate the wonderful revelations of God in His Nativity and His Resurrection the correct way, in fasting, prayer, and almsgiving. This nourishes the soul and strengthens the spirit.

[GunnyFreedom]

Christians are to fast for 40 days prior to the Nativity, seek confession for their sins, do acts of charity, pray unceasingly, and receive the Holy Eucharist on the Feast of the Nativity. This is how the Church should celebrate Christmas. The silly things you mentioned are not from the Church but are Western innovations.

and yet those western innovations existed in Europe prior to the advent of the Messiah, which same customs Christians participate in today as a celebration of Christmas.
“And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.” 2 Corinthians 6:15-18, KJV.

Of course. Which is why the Church has continued her worship like God's chosen people, Israel, as He instructed them to. Which is why the yearly cycles of celebrations exist, why incense is burned, why psalms are sung, why vestements are worn, why fasts are observed and why sacramental services are held. This is the way the prophets of God worshiped, how they instructed His people to worship, and how the Church continues to do so this day.If the church worshiped as God had instructed Israel, then we would at the least all be keeping the seven Biblical feasts. Unleavened Bread, Passover, Firstfruits, Weeks, Trumpets, Atonement, and Tabernacles. The scriptures even tell us that of all the nations through all the world -- AFTER Messiah has returned, that if the nations do not come up to celebrate Tabernacles God will kill their people and land with drought. Tabernacles was required of God's people before Messiah came, Messiah and His disciples celebrated Tabernacles during his ministry, and Tabernacles will be officially "required" to celebrate after Messiah returns...scripture covers all three before, during, and after being absolutely mandated by God...and yet somehow the Church says celebrating Tabernacles today is somehow wrong?

The Church has it wrong. No surprise there of course, "for there must first come a falling away" or apostasia. We were told it would happen, why is there so much resistance in recognizing it?


Let me guess. This happened circa 1600 AD? That would mean there was no Church prior to then? That the Body of Christ was not present on the earth. Then Christ is made a liar because He promised that the gates of hell would never prevail over the Church. This idea that the Church was lost makes a mockery of the Holy Spirit and the Power of God.No, I would say that the paganizing of the church really started taking place around 350 AD, and was pretty much complete by 500AD. The Gates of Hell will not prevail over the Church, but the church is corrupt. There will always be a remnant. The same Yeshua Messiah who said that the gates of hell would not prevail, also said that many would be decieved and that the love of many would grow cold. He alluded to the fact that the remnant who made it intact would be very small.
“And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. All these are the beginning of sorrows. Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake. And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” Matthew 24:4-14, KJV.
In the very same Bible Paul also speaks to the fact that there will come a falling away from the truth. I wouldn't doubt it, but I don't have to take it on faith as I can see it with my own eyes:
“Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.” 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4, KJV.

The Church is collapsing? Which Church are you referring to? Because the Church has been attacked since the beginning and tried to be snuffed out for 2000 years by the most ruthless and powerful men and has survived intact, unceasing, and will do so until the Final Day. Did the Church collapse in Russia in the 20th century, when tens of millions of martyrs were killed? Not at all, in fact it was strengthened! and as always has been the historical paradox that is the Christian faith, by the blood of the martyrs the Church is strengthened, and by our weakness He is perfected.Are we speaking about the same church that has forgotten charity? The same church that talks about how our government should 'take out' Assange as an enemy combatant? The same church that thinks it right and proper to hand over the authority of God to a corrupt and decaying government? The same church holding pep rallies as we saturate the children of Iraq with depleted uranium? The same church advocating an unprovoked invasion of Iran? The same church telling government to lock people into prison to get raped for possessing a God-given plant?

The only place the Church is not in utter decay today is where the Church is being severely persecuted. The church has grown decadent, and are expositing their own lusts as doctrine.

Remember how Gandhi said "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." How come the pagans can see in us what our own people obviously cannot?

Our church has become blinded to our own sins. We perceive glory where there is only wretchedness. The apostasia has come, we are in the midst of it, and somehow the vast majority of Christians are utterly blind to what, as far as i can see, should be blatantly obvious.


And point to me this very small remnant so that I may join them in worship? :D What if I told you this remnant is not that small!After my experience, it is difficult for me to imagine trusting anything outside of a small Messianic, or Hebrew Roots home church. If we cannot find one, it should probably be incumbent upon us to form one ourselves.


Friend, I have no argument with you here. The things you have mentioned are Western corruptions of the Feast of Pascha. 'Easter' has always been known in the Church as Pascha, and is actually the word 'Passover' signifying the Lord's Passover from death to life and is the fulfillment of Israel's exodus and triumph over Egypt which represented death. There are still Christians who celebrate Pascha like the apostolic Church, sans the bunny rabbit and the eggs. I assure you the Church exists, though not easily identified in this Western culture of commercialism and relativism.

Shun the trees and bunny rabbits if they cause you scandal. They are not worth it! But celebrate the days we commemorate the wonderful revelations of God in His Nativity and His Resurrection the correct way, in fasting, prayer, and almsgiving. This nourishes the soul and strengthens the spirit.Every bit of that and far, far more is already contained in the seven Biblical Feasts which God directed for His people to observe from the very beginning. Why would we want to add to or subtract from that?

The Spring Feasts, Unleavened Bread, Passover, Firstfruits, and Weeks depict every aspect and event of Messiah's first coming. The Fall feasts, Trumpets, Atonement, Tabernacles depict every aspect and event of His second coming. The ENTIRE ministry of Yeshua Messiah from beginning to end, 1st and 2nd advents is contained within the seven Biblical feasts, of which the Passover is part.

It is good that you celebrate the Passover rather than Easter. You are already way, way ahead of most. But just one out of seven isn't exactly all that good. If we already have an entire structure of Holy Days that contain the entire ministry of Christ, past present and future for all time from beginning to end, why, oh why would we want to forsake that in favor of a man-made schedule of holidays that fails to cover even a fraction of His ministry?

It should be blatantly obvious that that makes no sense. I posit that the Church should go back to keeping the seven feasts which God told His people to observe for all time. If, after all, the entire sum of Messiah's ministry is contained therein, then why in heaven's name would the church want to abandon them -- even so far as to revile at the suggestion of keeping them! "Oh you are judaizing! You want to enslave us to the LAW" :rolleyes:

Something is turning the church away into apostasia. I don't like it. I especially don't like how the vast majority seem utterly blind to what I find blatantly obvious. I can only imagine a supernatural power at work here, but I am not surprised. After all, we were told that all of this would happen. We were even told point blank that all of this would happen BEFORE the Gospel reached every corner of the Earth. Here we are now, with the Gospel having penetrated to pretty much every corner of the planet. To say then that this apostasy has not happened yet, as far as I can see, would be to call the scriptures of God a lie.

[Mini-Me]

Peanuts will always have a special place in my heart...especially their Christmas and Halloween specials. :)

Back when I was a teenager and a Christian, the commercialization of Christmas bothered me. I had a hard time reconciling the two sides of Christmas, because I loved the family time, and I loved the give-giving (and receiving ;)), but the latter was so commercialized that it felt wrong to associate with the birth of Jesus. I didn't know half the extent of it at the time, since I didn't know the pagan origins of most of our traditions, but I recognized that things weren't the way they should be.

I semi-rationalized gift-giving from the standpoint of the Three Kings story, but I was never actually satisfied with that rationalization. Originally, I wished there was a way to keep everything but integrate more religiosity and make everything focus more around Jesus. As time went on and I realized that was essentially a contradiction, I instead wished that we could cleanly separate Christmas and Christianity but still keep both.

Nowadays I'm agnostic, but I still love holiday traditions. A lot of that is just because of the hold that traditions can have over anyone, but a lot just has to do with them being fun, comfortable, and so easily divorced from the religion I drifted away from. It doesn't matter to me anymore whether Christmas trees, stockings, gift-giving, etc. are pagan rituals from Yule, or Biblically Christian, or inspired by Seinfeld fanfics written by Martians. For me, they're just part of my heritage. They're nice cultural excuses for fun family time, and they give me the warm fuzzies inside. (I never knew about the egg-exchanging orgy though. I think I'll sit that one out, because it's a bit rowdy for my tastes.)

Even though it doesn't matter to me though, I think it SHOULD matter to Christians. This is where I partially agree with Gunny: In order to restore its integrity, modern Christianity really needs to make an active effort to separate pagan-inspired rituals from the actual faith and reinstate more genuinely biblical rituals (except for killing Sunday workers like Moses and such ;)). That doesn't necessarily mean all of our comfortable rituals and traditions need be cast out as wicked or evil or anything like that; they're holdovers from pagan cultures and sometimes from religious elements of those cultures, but they've long since lost their pagan religious aspects as well and simply become part of the cultural melting pot.

Personally, I have no problem with this melting pot, and I place Christmas gift-giving in with Halloween, birthdays, family dinners, movie night, and all the other not-so-strictly-religious things that make life more intimate and fun. Of course, I'm not a Christian, so take my opinion on that with however much salt you need. Others might disagree, and they might wish to throw out any pagan-inspired traditions altogether from their personally-approved subset of the cultural melting pot. However, one way or another, I really believe that Christians need to actively separate the Christian faith from the cultural Borg, which respects no distinctions. ;) Nobody wants to do it, because it's a messy and difficult job swimming upstream against almost two thousand years of two-way assimilation, but it's the only way for Christianity to restore its integrity or even maintain its identity over the long term.

[GunnyFreedom]

Peanuts will always have a special place in my heart...especially their Christmas and Halloween specials. :)

Back when I was a teenager and a Christian, the commercialization of Christmas bothered me. I had a hard time reconciling the two sides of Christmas, because I loved the family time, and I loved the give-giving (and receiving ;)), but the latter was so commercialized that it felt wrong to associate with the birth of Jesus. I didn't know half the extent of it at the time, since I didn't know the pagan origins of most of our traditions, but I recognized that things weren't the way they should be.

I semi-rationalized gift-giving from the standpoint of the Three Kings story, but I was never actually satisfied with that rationalization. Originally, I wished there was a way to keep everything but make everything focus more around Jesus. As time went on and I realized that was essentially a contradiction, I instead wished that we could separate Christmas and Christianity but keep both.

Nowadays, I'm an agnostic, but I still love holiday traditions. A lot of that is just because of the hold that traditions can have over anyone, but a lot has to do with them being fun, comfortable, and so easily divorced from the religion I drifted away from. It doesn't matter to me anymore whether Christmas trees, stockings, gift-giving, etc. are pagan rituals from Yule, or Biblically Christian, or inspired by Seinfeld fanfics written by Martians. For me, they're just nice cultural excuses for fun family time, and they give me the warm fuzzies inside. (I never knew about the egg-exchanging orgy though. I think I'll sit that one out, because it's a bit rowdy for my tastes.)

Even though it doesn't matter to me though, I think it SHOULD matter to Christians. This is where I partially agree with Gunny: In order to restore its integrity, modern Christianity really needs to make an active effort to separate pagan-inspired rituals from the actual faith. That doesn't necessarily mean these rituals and traditions should be cast out as wicked or evil or anything like that; they're holdovers from pagan cultures, but they've long since lost their pagan religious aspects as well and simply become part of the cultural melting pot.

Personally, I have no problem with this melting pot, and I place Christmas gift-giving in with Halloween, birthdays, family dinners, movie night, and all the other not-so-strictly-religious things that make life more intimate and fun. Of course, I'm not a Christian, so take my opinion with a grain of salt. ;) Others might disagree, and they might wish to throw out any pagan-inspired traditions altogether from their personally-approved subset of the cultural melting pot. However, one way or another, I really believe that Christians need to actively separate the Christian faith from the cultural Borg, which respects no distinctions. ;) It's the only way for Christianity to restore its integrity or even maintain its identity over the long term.

Aye, I have little or no problem with describing Christmas and Easter as cultural festivals. I only get annoyed when I hear them described as though they were 'Christian.' They are, of course, anything but. I would be far, far less offended by Christmas....perhaps even go so far as being willing to participate myself...if we didn't pervert the Name of Christ by attaching it to these two festivals.

If we accept this, then what's next? Moloch the owl god gets a cross painted on it's chest and now we consider moloch-worship "Christian?" puhhhhlease. :rolleyes:

As far as I am concerned, if we have a pressing need to celebrate the Nativity, then Tabernacles is as good a time as any.
“And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” John 1:14, KJV.
That word "dwelt" is εσκηνωσεν a form of σκηνοω which literally means "to tabernacle." It's the same root as in the more formal name for the holiday "Tabernacles" σκηνοπηγια found in John 7:2.

The scriptures themselves tie the nativity in with Tabernacles, and we are directly commanded to observe Tabernacles before, during, and after Christ. Therefore, if we as a church are compelled to celebrate the nativity (which I do not object to) then the proper time to celebrate that is during Tabernacles.

[Mini-Me]

Aye, I have little or no problem with describing Christmas and Easter as cultural festivals. I only get annoyed when I hear them described as though they were 'Christian.' They are, of course, anything but. I would be far, far less offended by Christmas....perhaps even go so far as being willing to participate myself...if we didn't pervert the Name of Christ by attaching it to these two festivals.

If we accept this, then what's next? Moloch the owl god gets a cross painted on it's chest and now we consider Moloch-worship "christian?" puhhhhlease. :rolleyes:

As far as I am concerned, if we have a pressing need to celebrate the Nativity, then Tabernacles is as good a time as any.

“And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” John 1:14, KJV.
That word "dwelt" is εσκηνωσεν a form of σκηνοω which literally means "to tabernacle." It's the same root as in the more formal name for the holiday "Tabernacles" σκηνοπηγια found in John 7:2.

The scriptures themselves tie the nativity in with Tabernacles, and we are directly commanded to observe Tabernacles before, during, and after Christ. Therefore, if we as a church are compelled to celebrate the nativity (which I do not object to) then the proper time to celebrate that is during Tabernacles.

Sorry if I'm getting off track, but I'm just checking: You know that from research that spells out connections between the English text and the original text, right? That is, you didn't actually learn Koine Greek (I think?) to read the original text, did you? (If so, I'd be both awed...and vaguely horrified...I mean, that kind of education is exceedingly rare today.)

[GunnyFreedom]

Sorry if I'm getting off track, but I'm just checking: You know that from research that spells out connections between the English text and the original text, right? That is, you didn't actually learn Koine Greek (I think?) to read the original text, did you? (If so, I'd be both awed...and vaguely horrified...I mean, that kind of education is exceedingly rare today.)

LOL -- I attended Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary with the express and intent purpose of learning Biblical Hebrew and Koine Greek. I accomplished that goal, and I am so very glad that I did. The scriptures just make so much more sense in Hebrew and Greek, and you get the full range of 'color' that is lacking in the more 'black and white' English translations.

I have not stayed in deep enough practice to just read them outright like an English book, but with some struggle I can get through in the originals without an English translation to help me.

It only took 3 years -- would have only taken 2 years if SEBTS hadn't talked me into trying for a degree program while I was there. It's actually kinda funny. I went to SEBTS to learn Hebrew and Greek because I felt that was where God was leading me. SEBTS talks me into pursuing a full degree program (which actually distracted me from doing as well in the languages as I would like to have) and pretty much immediately after I finished 2nd year Greek I ran slam out of money and could no longer continue my studies.

I guess God really DID mean for me to go to SEBTS specifically just for Hebrew and Greek. ;) :D

[Mini-Me]

LOL -- I attended Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary with the express and intent purpose of learning Biblical Hebrew and Koine Greek. I accomplished that goal, and I am so very glad that I did. The scriptures just make so much more sense in Hebrew and Greek, and you get the full range of 'color' that is lacking in the more 'black and white' English translations.

I have not stayed in deep enough practice to just read them outright like an English book, but with some struggle I can get through in the originals without an English translation to help me.

It only took 3 years -- would have only taken 2 years if SEBTS hadn't talked me into trying for a degree program while I was there. It's actually kinda funny. I went to SEBTS to learn Hebrew and Greek because I felt that was where God was leading me. SEBTS talks me into pursuing a full degree program (which actually distracted me from doing as well in the languages as I would like to have) and pretty much immediately after I finished 2nd year Greek I ran slam out of money and could no longer continue my studies.

I guess God really DID mean for me to go to SEBTS specifically just for Hebrew and Greek. ;) :D

I have to say, that makes me feel pretty small and nauseous. ;) Consider me humbled, because that's neck deep in badass scholarship. :)

[GunnyFreedom]

I have to say, that makes me feel pretty small and nauseous. ;) Consider me humbled, because that's neck deep in badass scholarship. :)

Aww, c'mon, it's not that hard really. If you can go to High School and take 4 years of French, German, or Spanish it's not that different really. The only real difference is where you have to go to find the teachers and the courses. I happen to have a pretty eminent seminary about 12 minutes from my home, so it was a logical choice made easy.

If anything it's actually easier than learning a "normal" foreign language in High School or College because you don't actually have to speak it or converse in it, just read it. I was very fortunate though, in that the Hebrew courses taught at SEBTS focused on textural criticism, so I am now able to trace marginalis and addenda back to their originating fragments, and actually critically evaluate the production-level English translations.

Hebrew and Greek just LOOK intimidating because they use different glyphic forms in their alphabets. You get past that in a couple weeks and then it's just like learning any other foreign language. If anything, Latin is more difficult than Hebrew or Greek, it just doesn't look as hard because it uses the same alphabet.

I don't know squat from Latin. :D

English syntax is unbearably complicated. Whole sentences change their entire meanings by making minor word-order changes. Hebrew and Greek syntax is a lot simpler. Hebrew is really just a collection of verb/object pairings. Greek is really cool here though because it's the case-endings that determine meaning. You could literally chop every word out of a Greek sentence put the words in a bag, shake them up and dump them out and the sentence will mean the same thing. Word-order in Greek is only for emphasis.

If you can learn English, believe me you can learn Hebrew and Greek. It's not that the languages themselves are so complicated (they are really not), it's just hard to find the teachers and courses in order to learn it in the sort of formal environment conducive to actually learning foreign languages.

I was just fortunate to live near a Seminary that was actually good at it.

[Mini-Me]

Aww, c'mon, it's not that hard really. If you can go to High School and take 4 years of French, German, or Spanish it's not that different really. The only real difference is where you have to go to find the teachers and the courses. I happen to have a pretty eminent seminary about 12 minutes from my home, so it was a logical choice made easy.

If anything it's actually easier than learning a "normal" foreign language in High School or College because you don't actually have to speak it or converse in it, just read it. I was very fortunate though, in that the Hebrew courses taught at SEBTS focused on textural criticism, so I am now able to trace marginalis and addenda back to their originating fragments, and actually critically evaluate the production-level English translations.

Hebrew and Greek just LOOK intimidating because they use different glyphic forms in their alphabets. You get past that in a couple weeks and then it's just like learning any other foreign language. If anything, Latin is more difficult than Hebrew or Greek, it just doesn't look as hard because it uses the same alphabet.

I don't know squat from Latin. :D

English syntax is unbearably complicated. Whole sentences change their entire meanings by making minor word-order changes. Hebrew and Greek syntax is a lot simpler. Hebrew is really just a collection of verb/object pairings. Greek is really cool here though because it's the case-endings that determine meaning. You could literally chop every word out of a Greek sentence put the words in a bag, shake them up and dump them out and the sentence will mean the same thing. Word-order in Greek is only for emphasis.

If you can learn English, believe me you can learn Hebrew and Greek. It's not that the languages themselves are so complicated (they are really not), it's just hard to find the teachers and courses in order to learn it in the sort of formal environment conducive to actually learning foreign languages.

I was just fortunate to live near a Seminary that was actually good at it.

I think you're right that the biggest obstacles are psychological. I've used the same basic alphabet since I was a small child (throwing in only a few umlauts and such), so I can't even imagine how I'd ever mentally pronounce Greek words (I guess it's ironic that I just used the word "alphabet" ;)). Similarly, I also have trouble visualizing a language like Greek where word order does not dictate meaning. I deeply associate that aspect of English with logical cause and effect, even though I know I'm just looking at my language through its own lens. A lot of this is just fear of the unknown though, and I can understand that it would be different after actually diving in and making an effort. Someday, I think it'd be a good idea to learn something very different like that to keep my brain connections from calcifying too much, metaphorically speaking. ;)

Either way, the fact that you actually dove in and did it is impressive.

[crazyfacedjenkins]

What are we celebrating with Christmas? The "miracle" of a virgin birth? Sounds pretty fucking lame to me, artificial insemination is relatively common nowadays, no miracle there. Speaking of bull shit non-miracles, how come through modern science we can do all the stupid shit Jesus did?

1. Virgin birth -> artificial insemination
2. Cure leprosy -> antibiotics
3. Give deaf hearing -> cochlear implant
4. Make blind see -> cataract surgery
5. Water into wine -> yeast
6. Walk on water -> Criss Angel
7. Reanimate the dead -> defibrillator
8. Ascend to the heavens -> airplane

Does that mean we are now gods????

[JustinTime]

What are we celebrating with Christmas?

Im just having a good time and dont need a reason, so fuck all of ya!

The anti-Christmas people are the active side here, its already called Christmas and they want to change it, Christians and non-Christian Christmas lovers like myself are simply defending a bit of beloved cultural turf.

[JustinTime]

People who don't want it to be exclusively a Christian holiday would prefer people to say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas".

Christians must remember that Christians took a pagan holiday and made it a Christian holiday. So, there should be some respect shown to the pagans.

Heres the respect I give them: they can celebrate their holiday and I wont interfere. I wont try and rename Saturnalia decorations 'holiday decorations' or Hannukah candlesticks 'winter candle holders'. They can greet me however they want and I wont complain. All I ask for is reciprocity.

[TER]

After my experience, it is difficult for me to imagine trusting anything outside of a small Messianic, or Hebrew Roots home church. If we cannot find one, it should probably be incumbent upon us to form one ourselves.

The 'small, Messianic or Hebrew Roots home church' does exist and has since the day of Pentecost, and the ardent seeker will find it if they humble themselves and open their hearts. This is the Orthodox Church, the historical apostolic Church of Christ. I am sure the Baptist seminary you attended taught you otherwise! Of course, just because you learned that in a seminary does not make the teachings you received true. Or do you consider such a notion impossible?



The only place the Church is not in utter decay today is where the Church is being severely persecuted.

There is one Church which has been the most severely persecuted in the past 2000 years, and that is the Orthodox Church. If one sheds their prejudices and suppositions they have been indoctrinated with from their youth, they will find what many former Baptists and Protestants are learning- and that is that the New Testament Church does exist, free of the error of the Romans and steadfast in the teachings of Christ.

[GunnyFreedom]

The 'small, Messianic or Hebrew Roots home church' does exist and has since the day of Pentecost, and the ardent seeker will find it if they humble themselves and open their hearts. This is the Orthodox Church, the historical apostolic Church of Christ. I am sure the Baptist seminary you attended taught you otherwise! Of course, just because you learned that in a seminary does not make the teachings you received true. Or do you consider such a notion impossible?

:D your efforts to pigeonhole me have fallen VERY wide of the mark. ;)

What ever gave you the idea that I have ever been bought and sold to SBC groupthink and sectarian doctrine?

We might have a better time at actually having a discussion if you didn't just assume what you thought I learned at the Seminary, and maybe waited until you actually found out what I learned and believe?

Making wild assumptions of what I may or may not have been taught, or what I may or may not believe, does not lend itself to a constructive discussion, especially when those assumptions are in fact wildly inaccurate.

Nor do such assumptions stated as fact help to establish your credibility...


There is one Church which has been the most severely persecuted in the past 2000 years, and that is the Orthodox Church. If one sheds their prejudices and suppositions they have been indoctrinated with from their youth, they will find what many former Baptists and Protestants are learning- and that is that the New Testament Church does exist, free of the error of the Romans and steadfast in the teachings of Christ.

If you are not celebrating the Feast of Tabernacles as our God has commanded, then what more do I need to know?

[TER]

:D your efforts to pigeonhole me have fallen VERY wide of the mark. ;)

What ever gave you the idea that I have ever been bought and sold to SBC groupthink and sectarian doctrine?

We might have a better time at actually having a discussion if you didn't just assume what you thought I learned at the Seminary, and maybe waited until you actually found out what I learned and believe?

Making wild assumptions of what I may or may not have been taught, or what I may or may not believe, does not lend itself to a constructive discussion, especially when those assumptions are in fact wildly inaccurate.

Nor do such assumptions stated as fact help to establish your credibility...

If you have not been bought and sold to SBC groupthink and sectarian doctrine then why are you offended when I suggested that what you learned there may be in error?


If you are not celebrating the Feast of Tabernacles as our God has commanded, then what more do I need to know?

So in other words, your litmus test to the Church of Christ is whether they celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles of the Old Covenant?

[GunnyFreedom]

If you have not been bought and sold to SBC groupthink and sectarian doctrine then why are you offended when I suggested that what you learned there may be in error?

I learned that Plato was a Greek Philosopher. Is that in error? I learned how to conjugate Greek verbs. How about that one? I undertook no doctrinal courses at the Seminary. Again, you assumptions are sticking out in lumps. I was offended because it torques me off every time someone tries to tell me what I believe when I know different. That is a particular disease of sectarian Christians and it annoys me to no end.

Stop telling me what I believe. Stop telling me what I was taught. Stop telling me what I learned. Do you think you are God or something that you can look into my heart and tell me what I believe better than what I, myself, know to be what I believe?

I am offended because I have encountered your way of thinking in the church for over a decade AND IT MAKES ME VERY ANGRY.

So what do you do when I try to calmly and politely point out your error? YOU DOUBLE DOWN AND INSIST THAT YOU KNOW WHAT I THINK AND BELIEVE BETTER THAN I MYSELF KNOW WHAT I THINK AND BELIEVE.

How do you not know that by doing so you are elevating yourself into the position reserved only for God Himself?




So in other words, your litmus test to the Church of Christ is whether they celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles of the Old Covenant?

There is only one covenant, which has in recent times been renewed. :) That is why it is called the "B'rit Chadasha" It's only "new" like the "New Moon" (which, by the way, if you had not fallen into the error of following the Solar calendar you may have known that naturally)

Nor do I have any sort of litmus test other than being wholly given to Messiah in eternity.

SO STOP TELLING ME WHAT I BELIEVE!

If you ever had any hope of convincing me of the veracity of your sect, you have completely lost it. Any denomination that is Ok with their adherants pretending to be God is no sect I want to be a part of.

Sorry mate. :(

[TER]

I learned that Plato was a Greek Philosopher. Is that in error? I learned how to conjugate Greek verbs. How about that one? I undertook no doctrinal courses at the Seminary. Again, you assumptions are sticking out in lumps. I was offended because it torques me off every time someone tries to tell me what I believe when I know different. That is a particular disease of sectarian Christians and it annoys me to no end.

Stop telling me what I believe. Stop telling me what I was taught. Stop telling me what I learned. Do you think you are God or something that you can look into my heart and tell me what I believe better than what I, myself, know to be what I believe?

I am offended because I have encountered your way of thinking in the church for over a decade AND IT MAKES ME VERY ANGRY.

So what do you do when I try to calmly and politely point out your error? YOU DOUBLE DOWN AND INSIST THAT YOU KNOW WHAT I THINK AND BELIEVE BETTER THAN I MYSELF KNOW WHAT I THINK AND BELIEVE.

How do you not know that by doing so you are elevating yourself into the position reserved only for God Himself?


There is only one covenant, which has in recent times been renewed. :) That is why it is called the "B'rit Chadasha" It's only "new" like the "New Moon" (which, by the way, if you had not fallen into the error of following the Solar calendar you may have known that naturally)

Nor do I have any sort of litmus test other than being wholly given to Messiah in eternity.

SO STOP TELLING ME WHAT I BELIEVE!

If you ever had any hope of convincing me of the veracity of your sect, you have completely lost it. Any denomination that is Ok with their adherants pretending to be God is no sect I want to be a part of.

Sorry mate. :(

I am sorry you have reacted in such a way. I have not pretended to be God nor told you what you believe. I tried to have a discussion with you knowing that you do not celebrate Christmas or Easter and that you attended a Baptist Seminary School which when placed together seemed odd to me. Perhaps I made assumptions I shouldn't have made and I ask for your forgiveness. I still don't know what you believe, though your mention of the recently established B'rit Chadasha used by the recently established 'Messianic Jews' may be a clue. Perhaps you consider this the Church? I don't know. I would say history is against you if that is the case.

[GunnyFreedom]

I am sorry you have reacted in such a way. I have not pretended to be God nor told you what you believe. I tried to have a discussion with you knowing that you do not celebrate Christmas or Easter and that you attended a Baptist Seminary School which seemed odd to me. Perhaps I made assumptions I shouldn't have made and I ask for your forgiveness. I still don't know what you believe, though your mention of the recently established B'rit Chadasha may be a clue. Perhaps you consider this the Church? I don't know. I would say history is against you if that is the case.

The part in bold above outlines one of the primary reasons why you are making me so angry right now. Your request for forgiveness appears to be merely pro-forma. You do not seem to be sorry for telling me what I believe, you only seem sorry that I reacted to your usurpation of God's authority with anger.

Clearly you have never heard of the B'rit Chadasha. It's not 'recent' except inasmuch as it is more recent than Moses.

“Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant ברית חדשה (b'rit chadasha) with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:” Jeremiah 31:31, KJV.

[TER]

The part in bold above outlines one of the primary reasons why you are making me so angry right now. Your request for forgiveness appears to be merely pro-forma. You do not seem to be sorry for telling me what I believe, you only seem sorry that I reacted to your usurpation of God's authority with anger.

Clearly you have never heard of the B'rit Chadasha. It's not 'recent' except inasmuch as it is more recent than Moses.

“Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant ברית חדשה (b'rit chadasha) with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:” Jeremiah 31:31, KJV.


Now you are telling me whether I am sorry or not! This is the problem with internet discussion, because a written thing can be taken wrong and out of context. I, again, am not telling you what you believe. I don't know what you believe! I know that the Messianic Jewish movement is a recent phenomenon of the past 70 years and, while good in intentions, is weak in authority and grace. The quote from Jeremiah refers to the Church of Christ which He established 2000 years ago, not 70 years ago by well intentioned Jewish (and more recently, Protestant) converts.

Again, I am not claiming this is your belief, I am just making a statement about the Messianic Jewish movement. If you ascribe to these beliefs, than say so, so that we might really have a fruitful discussion.

[GunnyFreedom]

Now you are telling me whether I am sorry or not!

No, I am not. All of your statements regarding what I believe have been stated as facts. My statement was specifically phrased as what your words appeared to me as being. There is an enormous difference. If you can't see that, I'm afraid I can't help you. Again you did it again right here by telling me what I said when I specifically know otherwise.

STOP TELLING ME WHAT I BELIEVE!

How is that too hard to understand?


This is the problem with internet discussion, because thing can be taken wrong and out of context.That's right, the problem is with me. oh wait, no the problem is with the internet. oh wait no, the problem is anywhere but YOU. You just don't get it.


I, again, am not telling you what you believe. I don't know what you believe!Good. Then stop trying to tell me what I believe. Stop trying to insinuate that you are the final authority on what I really mean when I say something. If you cannot humble yourself enough to recognize this as a problem which you need to overcome, then you certainly have no business telling others what they should and should not believe.


I know that the Messianic Jewish movement is a recent phenomenon of the past 70 years and, while good in intentions, is weak in authority and grace. The quote from Jeremiah refers to the Church of Christ which He established 2000 years ago, not 70 years ago by well intentioned Jewish (and more recently, Protestant) converts.The first "Messianic Jew" was James the Apostle. He ran the synagogue out of Jerusalem. He's been around a lot longer than 70 years. More like 1980 years. Again, sorry. It has recently seen a serious resurgence. For a long time the remnant was buried in the Nazarenes. It is only recently re-emerging to prominence as a distinct movement as it is incurring doctrinal blessing towards the reformation of the broken sticks into one.
“Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions: And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.” Ezekiel 37:16, 17, KJV.
It is only natural that in the period leading up to the rejoining of the two stick into one, that the surrounding remnants of doctrine in this area will experience a resurgence.


Again, I am not claiming this is your belief, I am just making a statement about the Messianic Jewish movement. If you ascribe to these beliefs, than say so, so that we might really have a fruitful discussion.If we are going to have a fruitful discussion, you are going to have to come off that arrogance or I will continually be angry, indignant, and outraged. If someone who does not claim to be a Christian performs actions that usurp the authority of God, it doesn't affect me. If someone claiming to be a Christian does it, then I am outraged.

Stating suppositions as though they were facts is a mere annoyance which you are probably picking up in my tone right now. You claim to KNOW that Messianic Jews have only been around for 70 years. LOL what hogwash! :rolleyes:

I think for any discussion to move forward here profitably, or even amicably, then you are going to have to stop talking about all the stuff that you 'know' but just ain't so.

[Brian4Liberty]

What are we celebrating with Christmas? The "miracle" of a virgin birth? Sounds pretty fucking lame to me, artificial insemination is relatively common nowadays, no miracle there. Speaking of bull shit non-miracles, how come through modern science we can do all the stupid shit Jesus did?

1. Virgin birth -> artificial insemination
2. Cure leprosy -> antibiotics
3. Give deaf hearing -> cochlear implant
4. Make blind see -> cataract surgery
5. Water into wine -> yeast
6. Walk on water -> Criss Angel
7. Reanimate the dead -> defibrillator
8. Ascend to the heavens -> airplane

Does that mean we are now gods????

Jesus was a Capricorn (and a time-traveler?). ;)

[TER]

Which books of the Holy Bible do the Messianic Jewish movement use?

[crazyfacedjenkins]

Jesus was a Capricorn (and a time-traveler?). ;)

http://cache.io9.com/assets/resources/2008/04/WildStallyns.jpg

[cubical]

Christians must remember that Christians took a pagan holiday and made it a Christian holiday. So, there should be some respect shown to the pagans.

One could also say Constantine(or possibly someone before) chose the pagan holiday to REPLACE the pagan holiday. he chose to celebrate Christ's birth on that date because it was a pagan holiday, not because it came from pagans.

[GunnyFreedom]

Which books of the Holy Bible do the Messianic Jewish movement use?

I use the standard canon of the Protestants because it has the most widespread universal agreement. I have seen some pretty compelling works in apocrypha, but I only treat canon as canon for sake of common point of reference.

I will never claim to speak for a whole movement.

[Brian4Liberty]

Christians must remember that Christians took a pagan holiday and made it a Christian holiday. So, there should be some respect shown to the pagans.

YouTube - I'm The Happiest Christmas Tree (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PakNPbMmQUs)

[TER]

I use the standard canon of the Protestants because it has the most widespread universal agreement. I have seen some pretty compelling works in apocrypha, but I only treat canon as canon for sake of common point of reference.

I will never claim to speak for a whole movement.

Do you use the Septuagint for the Old Testament?

[Vessol]

Never really cared about Christmas tbh. I like Christmas dinner, that's about it. Personally I prefer Thanksgiving more, less bullshit surrounding it.

[GunnyFreedom]

Do you use the Septuagint for the Old Testament?

No. I do use the LXX for cross-reference however. I use the Biblia Hebraica Stutgarten as canon for the Tanakh, what most of the church calls the Old Testiment.

[TER]

No. I do use the LXX for cross-reference however. I use the Biblia Hebraica Stutgarten as canon for the Tanakh, what most of the church calls the Old Testiment.

I would propose to you two things: 1) that the Church of Christ would be the one which determined which books of the bible are canonical and 2) the Church would use the Septuagint for the Old Testament since this is the version which is referred to by Christ, the version overwhelmingly quoted in the Gospels, and is the most accurate and reliable version of the ancient Hebrew Bible that exists today. The Masoretic text widely used by the modern Jews and by more recent Christian churches, notably the Protestant, was prepared much later than the Septuagint. In fact, it was prepared after the destruction of the temple and revised by the Jews of the day to omit or obscure prophetic passages regarding Christ which are found in the Septuagint. So, in terms of forensic historical data, the Septuagint is much more authentic to the interpretations of the revealed Word of God than the altered modern version of the Hebrew text, of which the earliest complete extant is found in the 10th century AD.

[GunnyFreedom]

I would propose to you two things: 1) that the Church of Christ would be the one which determined which books of the bible are canonical and 2) the Church would use the Septuagint for the Old Testament since this is the version which is referred to by Christ, the version overwhelmingly quoted in the Gospels, and is the most accurate and reliable version of the ancient Hebrew Bible that exists today. The Masoretic text widely used by the modern Jews and by more recent Christian churches, notably the Protestant, was prepared much later than the Septuagint. In fact, it was prepared after the destruction of the temple and revised by the Jews of the day to omit or obscure prophetic passages regarding Christ which are found in the Septuagint. So, in terms of forensic historical data, the Septuagint is much more authentic to the interpretations of the revealed Word of God than the altered modern version of the Hebrew text, of which the earliest complete extant is found in the 10th century AD.

The Septuagint is in Greek, not Hebrew. It is a translation of the originals, and the full Hebrew texts of the Tanakh have been found (fragmentally, mind you) at Qumran, they predate the destruction of the second Temple, and are in complete agreement with the Masoretic text. The only thing that has really been added to the Masoretic text are the vowel points.

You forget that I am capable of tracing every line of text...especially in the Tanakh, to it's earliest fragmentary witness. The argument that the LXX is superior to the BHS simply because earlier copies of the translation existed from the destroyed library at Alexandria does not hold water.

Quotes of the Tanakh appearing in the Brit Chadasha (New Testament) will match the LXX as a matter of course, much of the NT being written in Greek, and the work of translation already having been done.

Surely you do not think Messiah spoke Greek during His ministry in Israel?

He spoke Aramaic and Hebrew, and there is some evidence that Matthew and Mark were autographed in Aramaic or Hebrew and then translated into Greek for the received texts. I have even heard a compelling argument for John being autographed in Hebrew, but I lean towards a Greek autograph for John on account of the TR being more "colorful" than the Syriac Peshitto.

Occam's razor would tend to select the probable hypothesis being that quotes of the "OT" found in the "NT" matching the LXX on account of scribal practice when the Gospels were translated or authored in Greek.

Translation between Hebrew and Greek (like any other language) is not an exact science, and variations will appear (especially in such things as word order which have little or no effect on meaning in Greek). Your choices boil down to either the Messiah spoke Greek during His ministry and thus quoted the LXX, making it authoritative as you say (highly improbable), or the LXX was used for rendering quotes when penning the Greek Gospels so as to avoid translation variants (far more likely).

The notion that the Messiah used the LXX as authoritative and quoted from it as recorded in the Greek Gospels ignores the dramatic differences between the basic structure of the two languages. There IS NO precise translation between Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek which will result in precise replication the way you can between say English and French. The only way for such quotes to match the LXX in exact form was either for the authors of the Greek Gospels to have used the LXX as a reference, or the Messiah to have spoken Greek.

It is the very fact that "OT" quotes found in the "NT" match so perfectly which precludes your argument as to authority. Messiah was not quoting the LXX, that's ridiculous. His audience would have stared at Him uncomprehending like He was some kind of foreigner. Instead, precise replication speaks to scribes (or authors) daring not to affect the scriptures though the iposition of their own personal translation from the Hebrew to the Greek, and thus they copied those passages from the accepted contemporary vulgate.

For your argument to have merit, there would had had to have been at the very least some word order variance between said NT quotes of the OT and the LXX.

I would think it should be apparent that the idea the Greek translation of Hebrew scripture should be more authoritative than the Hebrew scripture is as much a rationalization as the modern day "King James only" movement which seems to think that Yeshua Messiah Himself read from the English King James version.

The argument falls on first blush, and then falls again on critical examination, and again does not stand up to textural criticism. Fortunately, we also have the findings as Qumran to erase any lingering doubts.

There is no question in my mind but that the Hebrew Tanakh (Old Testament) is more authoritative than the Greek translation found in the Septuagint. I have looked at the issue in depth from a variety of disciplines -- faithfully, semantically, syntactically, and scientifically -- and I have arrived at the same conclusion in all cases.

I don't come to my conclusions lightly. I never have, and I never will.

[TER]

I don't come to my conclusions lightly. I never have, and I never will.

On this, I can agree with! I admire your knowledge and am enjoying this debate. That being said, I disagree with your conculsions. :)

The Septuagint was written in Koine Greek. You are correct about this. It was also the most widely read version of the Scriptures in its day, as Greek was the lingua france of the day not unlike English is today. It was translated (in a miraculous way if one studies the history) by prominent Hebrews scholars of the day (300 years before Christ was born) and was indisputably considered an authoritative version by the Jewish authorities until much later when the Jews wanted to obscure some of the prophetic passages in the writings of the prophets. This new attempt at discrediting the Septuagint and re-writting the Hebrew texts started at the end of the first century AD (by the Sanhedrin no less)! Meanwhile, the vast majority of the quotes in the Gospels are taken from the Septuagint. It is fair to say that the use of the Septuagint was used by the Apostles, the early Church, and Christ Himself. Christ spoke mostly Aramaic, that's true. But he spoke Greek as well (not only because He is God and can speak any language and directly to the angels and demons themselves, but because Greek was well known throughout that entire part of the world at that time).

Of the 300 quotes of the Old Testament in the New Testament, 3/4 of them are from the Septuagint (including the deuterocanonical books later removed by the Protestants). Here's an incomplete list of the differences:

***

Matt. 1:23 / Isaiah 7:14 - behold, a "virgin" shall conceive. Hebrew - behold, a "young woman" shall conceive.

Matt. 3:3; Mark 1:3; John 1:23 / Isaiah 40:3 - make "His paths straight." Hebrew - make "level in the desert a highway."

Matt. 9:13; 12:7 / Hosea 6:6 - I desire "mercy" and not sacrifice. Hebrew - I desire "goodness" and not sacrifice.

Matt. 12:21 / Isaiah 42:4 - in His name will the Gentiles hope (or trust). Hebrew - the isles shall wait for his law.

Matt. 13:15 / Isaiah 6:10 - heart grown dull; eyes have closed; to heal. Hebrew - heart is fat; ears are heavy; eyes are shut; be healed.

Matt. 15:9; Mark 7:7 / Isaiah 29:13 - teaching as doctrines the precepts of men. Hebrew - a commandment of men (not doctrines).

Matt. 21:16 / Psalm 8:2 - out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou has "perfect praise." Hebrew - thou has "established strength."

Mark 7:6-8 – Jesus quotes Isaiah 29:13 from the Septuagint – “This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.”

Luke 3:5-6 / Isaiah 40:4-5 - crooked be made straight, rough ways smooth, shall see salvation. Hebrew - omits these phrases.

Luke 4:18 / Isaiah 61:1 - and recovering of sight to the blind. Hebrew - the opening of prison to them that are bound.

Luke 4:18 / Isaiah 58:6 - to set at liberty those that are oppressed (or bruised). Hebrew - to let the oppressed go free.

John 6:31 / Psalm 78:24 - He gave them "bread" out of heaven to eat. Hebrew - gave them "food" or "grain" from heaven.

John 12:38 / Isaiah 53:1 - who has believed our "report?" Hebrew - who has believed our "message?"

John 12:40 / Isaiah 6:10 - lest they should see with eyes...turn for me to heal them. Hebrew - shut their eyes...and be healed.

Acts 2:19 / Joel 2:30 - blood and fire and "vapor" of smoke. Hebrew - blood and fire and "pillars" or "columns" of smoke.

Acts 2:25-26 / Psalm 16:8 - I saw...tongue rejoiced...dwell in hope.. Hebrew - I have set...glory rejoiced...dwell in safety.

Acts 4:26 / Psalm 2:1 - the rulers "were gathered together." Hebrew - rulers "take counsel together."

Acts 7:14 / Gen. 46:27; Deut. 10:22 - Stephen says "seventy-five" souls went down to Egypt. Hebrew - "seventy" people went.

Acts 7:27-28 / Exodus 2:14 - uses "ruler" and judge; killed the Egyptian "yesterday." Hebrew - uses "prince" and there is no reference to "yesterday."

Acts 7:43 / Amos 5:26-27 - the tent of "Moloch" and star of god of Rephan. Hebrew - "your king," shrine, and star of your god.

Acts 8:33 / Isaiah 53:7-8 - in his humiliation justice was denied him. Hebrew - by oppression...he was taken away.

Acts 13:41 / Habakkuk 1:5 - you "scoffers" and wonder and "perish." Hebrew - you "among the nations," and "be astounded."

Acts 15:17 / Amos 9:12 - the rest (or remnant) of "men." Hebrew - the remnant of "Edom."

Rom. 2:24 / Isaiah 52:5 - the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles. Hebrew - blasphemed (there is no mention of the Gentiles).

Rom. 3:4 / Psalm 51:4 - thou mayest "prevail" (or overcome) when thou art judged. Hebrew - thou might "be clear" when thou judges.

Rom. 3:12 / Psalm 14:1,3 - they "have gone wrong." Hebrew - they are "corrupt" or "filthy."

Rom. 3:13 / Psalm 5:9 - they use their tongues to deceive. Hebrew - they flatter with their tongues. There is no "deceit" language.

Rom. 3:13 / Psalm 140:3 - the venom of "asps" is under their lips. Hebrew - "Adder's" poison is under their lips.

Rom. 3:14 / Psalm 10:7 - whose mouth is full of curses and "bitterness." Hebrew - cursing and "deceit and oppression."

Rom. 9:17 / Exodus 9:16 - my power "in you"; my name may be "proclaimed." Hebrew - show "thee"; may name might be "declared."

Rom. 9:25 / Hosea 2:23 - I will call my people; I will call my beloved. Hebrew - I will have mercy (love versus mercy).

Rom. 9:27 / Isaiah 10:22 - only a remnant of them "will be saved." Hebrew - only a remnant of them "will return."

Rom. 9:29 / Isaiah 1:9 - had not left us "children." Hebrew - Jehova had left us a "very small remnant."

Rom. 9:33; 10:11; 1 Peter 2:6 / Isaiah 28:16 - he who believes will not be "put to shame." Hebrew - shall not be "in haste."

Rom. 10:18 / Psalm 19:4 - their "voice" has gone out. Hebrew - their "line" is gone out.

Rom. 10:20 / Isaiah 65:1 - I have "shown myself" to those who did not ask for me. Hebrew - I am "inquired of" by them.

Rom. 10:21 / Isaiah 65:2 - a "disobedient and contrary" people. Hebrew - a "rebellious" people.

Rom. 11:9-10 / Psalm 69:22-23 - "pitfall" and "retribution" and "bend their backs." Hebrew - "trap" and "make their loins shake."

Rom. 11:26 / Isaiah 59:20 - will banish "ungodliness." Hebrew - turn from "transgression."

Rom. 11:27 / Isaiah 27:9 - when I take away their sins. Hebrew - this is all the fruit of taking away his sin.

Rom. 11:34; 1 Cor. 2:16 / Isaiah 40:13 -the "mind" of the Lord; His "counselor." Hebrew - "spirit" of the Lord; "taught" Him.

Rom. 12:20 / Prov. 25:21 - feed him and give him to drink. Hebrew - give him "bread" to eat and "water" to drink.

Rom. 15:12 / Isaiah 11:10 - the root of Jesse..."to rule the Gentiles." Hebrew - stands for an ensign. There is nothing about the Gentiles.

Rom. 15:21 / Isaiah 52:15 - been told "of him"; heard "of him." Hebrew - does not mention "him" (the object of the prophecy).

1 Cor. 1:19 / Isaiah 29:14 - "I will destroy" the wisdom of the wise. Hebrew - wisdom of their wise men "shall perish."

1 Cor. 5:13 / Deut. 17:7 - remove the "wicked person." Hebrew - purge the "evil." This is more generic evil in the MT.

1 Cor. 15:55 / Hosea 13:14 - O death, where is thy "sting?" Hebrew - O death, where are your "plagues?"

2 Cor. 4:13 / Psalm 116:10 - I believed and so I spoke (past tense). Hebrew - I believe, for I will speak (future tense).

2 Cor. 6:2 / Isaiah 49:8 - I have "listened" to you. Hebrew - I have "answered" you.

Gal. 3:10 / Deut. 27:26 - cursed be every one who does not "abide" by all things. Hebrew - does not "confirm" the words.

Gal. 3:13 / Deut. 21:23 - cursed is everyone who hangs on a "tree." Hebrew - a hanged man is accursed. The word "tree" does not follow.

Gal. 4:27 / Isaiah 54:1 - "rejoice" and "break forth and shout." Hebrew - "sing" and "break forth into singing."

2 Tim. 2:19 / Num. 16:5 - The Lord "knows" those who are His. Hebrew - God will "show" who are His.

Heb. 1:6 / Deut. 32:43 - let all the angels of God worship Him. Hebrew - the Masoretic text omits this phrase from Deut. 32:43.

Heb. 1:12 / Psalm 102:25 - like a "mantle" ... "roll them"... "will be changed." Hebrew - "raiment"... "change"..."pass away."

Heb. 2:7 / Psalm 8:5 - thou has made Him a little "lower than angels." Hebrew - made Him but a little "lower than God."

Heb. 2:12 / Psalm 22:22 - I will " sing" thy praise. Hebrew - I will praise thee. The LXX and most NTs (but not the RSV) have "sing."

Heb. 2:13 / Isaiah 8:17 - I will "put my trust in Him." Hebrew - I will "look for Him."

Heb. 3:15 / Psalm 95:8 - do not harden your hearts as "in the rebellion." Hebrew - harden not your hearts "as at Meribah."

Heb. 3:15; 4:7 / Psalm 95:7 - when you hear His voice do not harden not your hearts. Hebrew - oh that you would hear His voice!

Heb. 8:9-10 / Jer. 31:32-33 - (nothing about husband); laws into their mind. Hebrew - I was a husband; law in their inward parts.

Heb. 9:28 / Isaiah 10:22 - "to save those" who are eagerly awaiting for Him. Hebrew - a remnant of them "shall return."

Heb. 10:5 / Psalm 40:6 - "but a body hast thou prepared for me." Hebrew - "mine ears hast thou opened."

Heb. 10:38 / Hab. 2:3-4 - if he shrinks (or draws) back, my soul shall have no pleasure. Hebrew - his soul is puffed up, not upright.

Heb. 11:5 / Gen. 5:24 - Enoch was not "found." Hebrew - Enoch was "not."

Heb. 11:21 / Gen. 47:31 - Israel, bowing "over the head of his staff." Hebrew - there is nothing about bowing over the head of his staff.

Heb. 12:6 / Prov. 3:12 - He chastises every son whom He receives. Hebrew - even as a father the son in whom he delights.

Heb. 13:6 / Psalm 118:6 - the Lord "is my helper." Hebrew - Jehova "is on my side." The LXX and the NT are identical.

James 4:6 / Prov. 3:34 - God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. Hebrew - He scoffs at scoffers and gives grace to the lowly.

1 Peter 1:24 / Isaiah 40:6 - all its "glory" like the flower. Hebrew - all the "goodliness" as the flower.

1 Pet. 2:9 / Exodus 19:6 - you are a "royal priesthood." Hebrew - you shall be to me a "kingdom of priests."

1 Pet. 2:9 / Isaiah 43:21 - God's own people...who called you out of darkness. Heb. - which I formed myself. These are different actions.

1 Pet. 2:22 / Isaiah 53:9 - he "committed no sin." Hebrew - he "had done no violence."

1 Pet. 4:18 / Prov. 11:31 - if a righteous man "is scarcely saved." Hebrew - if the righteous "is recompensed."

1 Pet. 5:5 / Prov. 3:34 - God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. Hebrew - He scoffs at scoffers and gives grace to lowly.

Isaiah 11:2 - this verse describes the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit, but the seventh gift, "piety," is only found in the Septuagint.

***



I would think it should be apparent that the idea the Greek translation of Hebrew scripture should be more authoritative than the Hebrew scripture is as much a rationalization as the modern day "King James only" movement which seems to think that Yeshua Messiah Himself read from the English King James version.

But this is hyperbole. The fact remains that the Septuagint was the most widely read authoritative book in Jesus' day, is the oldest complete version available, is the most widely quoted version mention by the writers of the New Testament, and the version used from the beginning of the Church (and cursed by the Sanhedrin).


There is no question in my mind but that the Hebrew Tanakh (Old Testament) is more authoritative than the Greek translation found in the Septuagint. I have looked at the issue in depth from a variety of disciplines -- faithfully, semantically, syntactically, and scientifically -- and I have arrived at the same conclusion in all cases.

I humbly submit to you that you still have more to learn. I say this because you rely on the correlation between the modern Masoretic translations and ancient fragments (which will of course be, on the majority, concordant) and ignore the other most important differences which have made the Septuagint the more authoritative text since the birth of the Church.

[TER]

Did Christ use the Septuagint?

In Mark 7, Christ is before the leaders of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law and He quotes Isaiah 29:13 taken directly from the Septuagint. Christ not only knew the Septuagint (as did all the Jews of the day), He used it in His ministry.

[Justinjj1]

I didn't read the whole thread, but I watched the video and found it pretty amusing.

It's ridiculous that anybody buys into this Fox News contrived "War on Christmas" b.s. It's just a way for them to get their blithering, religious-right, retard fanbase worked up and tuning in.

Just like clockwork, every late Novemember the Fox News talking heads find something inconsequential to complain about. They can't seem to get it through their skulls that Christianity doesn't have a monopoly on the holiday season.

[JustinTime]

I didn't read the whole thread, but I watched the video and found it pretty amusing.

It's ridiculous that anybody buys into this Fox News contrived "War on Christmas" b.s. It's just a way for them to get their blithering, religious-right, retard fanbase worked up and tuning in.

Just like clockwork, every late Novemember the Fox News talking heads find something inconsequential to complain about. They can't seem to get it through their skulls that Christianity doesn't have a monopoly on the holiday season.

You're so right, its inconsequential. Anyone who wastes a second on this needs to get a hobby. So let us reasonable folks who care not what some parade is called acquiesce to the childish demands of the religious right and refrain from trying to give new names to their Christmas events, if for nothing else than to get them to STFU.

How 'bout it all you 'dont care what its called' people? Lets just leave it alone. Its not a big deal, right?

[ronpaulgirl]

I have to say gunnyFreedom won the debate. It's hard to come to terms with this truth, heck Im southernbaptist, it wont make u popular to state the ttuthoffxmas, but it will make yourfaith increase. Jesus was born in September, celebrate then. Good debate Gunny

[oyarde]

I have to say gunnyFreedom won the debate. It's hard to come to terms with this truth, heck Im southernbaptist, it wont make u popular to state the ttuthoffxmas, but it will make yourfaith increase. Jesus was born in September, celebrate then. Good debate Gunny

I know the truth , but I am still not giving up my Christmas tree :)

[JustinTime]

I know the truth , but I am still not giving up my Christmas tree :)

Somehow, I just dont think Jesus would mind your tree. If I recall my old sunday school lessons correctly, Jesus didnt care much for strict religious zealots following the letter of the law while ignoring the spirit of it.

I bet anything the exact date of his birth, pagan traditions grafted onto Christmas like bringing trees into homes, and the dreaded commercialization, wouldnt bother him one bit. As long as these things are done with the intention of having a good time with your friends and family I think he'd like it.

That said, letting Cultural Marxists have their way and turn Christmas into a bland, generic 'Holiday' in which we worship our new national religion, diversity, would be awful. Highly religious folk would be foolish to stand by and allow that. They are actually moving in the opposite direction, making their observance a bit player in a cast of many holidays, one played against the other with the Marxist priests if Multiculturalism acting as umpires.

Its no wonder these people beat us everytime.

[Flash]

I celebrate Christmas for the pagan traditions. Even though I'm more of an agnostic now. I like the actual myth/story of Jesus, even though I don't believe he was an actual person, or if the documents surrounding him were accurate.