Christmas: Debunking the Pagan Myth

 

IS CHRISTMAS A PAGAN HOLIDAY?

Every year, the debate resurfaces: Did Christians “borrow” December 25th and its traditions from ancient pagan festivals?

Surprisingly, history says otherwise.

Let’s walk through the evidence and separate myth from reality.

---

1. THE DATE: DECEMBER 25TH

The Claim

Christmas is celebrated on December 25th because early Christians copied pagan festivals like Sol Invictus, Saturnalia, or the Winter Solstice.

The Reality

Sol Invictus

• The festival wasn’t tied to December 25th until AD 354, and even then, the calendar doesn’t describe a sun festival that day.
• Earlier Roman inscriptions list sun festivals on:
• August 8, 9, 28
• December 11
• Possibly October 19
• Emperor Aurelian celebrated the sun through chariot races October 19–22.

Winter Solstice

• Ancient Romans did not treat the Winter Solstice as a major festival.
• No celebratory traditions existed.
• Even the solstice date was debated:
• Julian Calendar: December 25
• Pliny the Elder: December 26
• Columella: December 23

Saturnalia

• Saturnalia never fell on December 25.
• Macrobius records it beginning on December 17, lasting three days.
• Some calendars extended it to December 24—but never the 25th.

---

2. SANTA CLAUS: FROM SAINT TO SYMBOL

The Origins of “Santa”

• Santa Claus grew from Dutch immigrants in 1800s New York.
• Based on Sinterklaas (St. Nicholas), whose feast was December 6th.
• Later merged with December 25th to shape Christmas as a family holiday.
• Newspapers promoted gift-giving on Christmas instead of New Year’s.
• Sinterklaas evolved from a bishop into a red-suited Dutchman.
• The tradition spread globally, taking on regional adaptations.
• Stockings originated from Clement C. Moore’s poem “A Visit from St. Nicholas.”
• In 1927, Finland’s Markus Rautio reshaped the pagan figure Joulupukki into a Santa-like image.

Father Christmas

• Older than Santa, but not pagan.
• A medieval symbol of the season.
• First referenced by Richard Smart of Plymtree, who described him as a herald of Christmas.

---

3. CHRISTMAS TREES: NOT A PAGAN PRACTICE

The Claim

Christmas trees stem from druidic or pagan rituals involving evergreen trees.

The Reality

• Christmas trees trace back only to the 16th century.
• The earliest known reference appears in an Alsace ordinance.
• Early pagans did not link pine trees to December festivities.
• Germanic tribes viewed the oak, not pine, as sacred.
• Maximus of Tyre wrote:
  “The Celts indeed worship Zeus, but they honour Him in the form of a lofty oak.”

---

4. MISTLETOE: A MODERN TRADITION

Despite assumptions, mistletoe’s Christmas use is not pagan.

• First appears in Robert Herrick’s Hesperides (poems 892, 980).
• William Coles mentioned it in The Art of Simpling (1600s).
• Kissing under mistletoe arose in Britain during the late 18th century.

---

CONCLUSION

The popular claim that Christmas is a pagan holiday simply does not align with historical facts.

The traditions we associate with Christmas developed through Christian practice, cultural influence, and centuries of celebration—not pagan rituals.

From the date itself to Santa, Christmas trees, and mistletoe, the evidence points to a rich Christian heritage that evolved over time.

Endnotes:

This article is based on Wesley Huff’s infographic, available in the “Holidays” section of his website: https://www.wesleyhuff.com/infographics

Christmas Myths: What Not To Believe!

            We should believe in facts and not fiction, especially if it relates to one of the essential beliefs of Historic Christianity. Herein, The Gospel Coalition details five common misconceptions Christians continue to believe about the Christmas narrative:¹

1. There Was a Star the Night Jesus Was Born

It’s difficult to find a nativity scene (or Christmas play) without a star over the manger. Indeed, this might be the quintessential symbol of the birth of Jesus.

The problem is there’s no indication the star hovered over the manger on the night Jesus was born. On the contrary, when the angels announced the birth of Jesus to the shepherds watching their flocks by night (Luke 2:8–11), they weren’t told to look for a star. They were told to look for something else: “And this will be a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger” (Luke 2:12).

The star was given not to the shepherds but to the Magi (Matt. 2:2), who appear to be visiting Jesus at a later time period. How much later is unclear, but the fact that Herod commands all the babies in the region younger than 2 years old to be killed suggests Jesus may have been in Bethlehem for some time.

2. There Were Three Wise Men

Speaking of the wise men, in both art and in song (“We Three Kings”) we get the undeniable impression there were three of them (also called “Magi”). The problem, however, is that this number is found nowhere in the biblical accounts.

Matthew simply tells us, “Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the east came to Jerusalem” (Matt. 2:1).

The idea of three wise men likely came from the fact that Matthew mentions three gifts: gold, frankincense, and myrrh (Matt. 2:11).

3. There Was No Room for Them in the Inn

Another staple of modern nativity plays is the scene at the inn. Joseph and his wife, Mary—who is on the verge of giving birth—are cruelly turned away by the innkeeper who shows them no compassion.

Here is another popular misconception. The Bible never mentions an innkeeper. In fact, it’s possible there was never even an “inn” at all.

A recent study by Stephen Carlson makes the case (a compelling one, I think) that the Greek word normally translated as “inn” (καταλύματι) in Luke 2:7 is best translated as “place to stay.” So the passage isn’t saying there was no room in the inn, but rather there was no room for baby Jesus in the place they stayed. In what place were they staying? Carlson argues it was probably in the home of Joseph’s family in Bethlehem, perhaps in an adjacent guest room (which would have been small).

4. Jesus Was Born in a Barn or Stable

Since Joseph could find no spot in the inn, the reasoning goes, he must have been forced to stay in the stable. Indeed, every nativity scene ever created places Jesus in a barn of sorts.

But the text doesn’t say he was born in a barn. It only says Mary “laid in him in a manger” (Luke 2:7). Although that might seem to suggest a barn, it was common for mangers to be kept in the main room of village houses during this time period. Why? Because the animals were often housed just a few feet away in an adjacent room.

It seems likely, then, that Mary gave birth to Jesus while they were staying at the home of Joseph’s relatives in Bethlehem. But the room in which they stayed—likely a tight guest room or hastily added chamber—couldn’t accommodate a birth. So, Mary had to give birth in the larger family room and lay Jesus in the nearby manger.

5. Jesus Was Born on December 25

If we celebrate Jesus’s birthday on December 25, it’s logical to think this was the day on which he was born. But the precise date of Jesus’s birth is uncertain. A variety of options have been suggested throughout church history, including March 21, April 15, and May 20.

So how did December 25 become the date? It’s commonly thought Christians took over the pagan holiday of Sol Invictus (“Unconquered Son”), which was on December 25. But there’s little evidence to back this up.

Instead it seems early Christians may have reasoned from the supposed date of Mary’s conception, which was thought to be March 25—the same day Jesus was thought to be crucified. Fast forward nine months and you land on December 25 for his birth.

Real Christmas Story

These five misconceptions remind us that sometimes our picture of scriptural stories is shaped more by popular perceptions and modern retellings than by the text itself. But when we take a closer look at the biblical clues, a wonderful—and hopefully more accurate—picture emerges of what happened that night nearly 2,000 years ago.

And what happened that night still stands as one of the most monumental events in human history. God became a man and entered our dark, cold world to redeem a sinful people.

And that is a story that makes Christmas worthy of being “Merry.”

Endnotes: 

¹ https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/5-popular-misconceptions-christmas-story/, last accessed on 23^rd December 2021. 

To Celebrate Christmas Or Not To? (Is There A Pagan Origin To Christmas?)

 

          When I was a teen, I had no qualms about celebrating Christmas. There were no social media back then. It probably made the decision easier.

            Today, social media rules. So we hear that Christians should not celebrate Christmas because it was once a pagan holiday. Doubt then creeps into a sincere Christian mind.

            Should we celebrate Christmas or not?

            But first, let’s see if Christmas had pagan roots?

            Much unlike contemporary comprehension, there are two theories. One - a popular theory, and another not so popular.

            J. Warner Wallace of Cold Case Christianity highlights the claim that Christmas had pagan roots. This is the popular theory.

            In his article entitled, Enjoy Christmas, Even Though It’s Probably Not Jesus’ Birthday, J. Warner Wallace wrote:¹

For many centuries before the birth of Christ, December 25th was similarly non-Christian. The present date for Christmas traces back to the 4th Century. When Constantine declared Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire, he introduced the faith to a culture already deeply committed to the pagan worship of Roman gods. Christian leaders were in for a real challenge as they wrestled with prior cultural commitments to these gods. Pagan festivals and celebrations abounded throughout the year, celebrating and honoring Roman gods of one variety or another.

One of Rome’s biggest religious festivals occurred in the winter. The festival was called “Saturnalia”, and it was a celebration coinciding with the winter solstice. It occurred over a period of time corresponding to December 17th – 24th, ending on December 25th. This date, declared by Emperor Aurelian in 274AD to be “Dies Natalis Invicti Solis” (“Day of the Birth of the Unconquered Sun”), was a celebration of the Roman god, Saturn. The winter solstice also occurred around this time, celebrated when the sun reached its most southerly declination (when the North Pole is tilted 23.5 degrees from the sun). This marked the beginning of a number of pre-Roman pagan festivals and Roman holidays.

It shouldn’t surprise us this important pre-Christian holiday season would eventually take a Christian form. As a strategic consequence of those who wished to advance the truth of the Gospel, or simply as a cultural inevitability, December 25th became a Christian celebration. St. Augustine of Hippo (the early church theologian of the 4th and 5th Century), wrote about the newly adopted celebration, and said:

“We hold this day (December 25th) holy, not like the pagans because of the birth of the sun, but because of him who made it”

            Although this theory is a popular theory, there is another theory - more ancient in its origin.

            Andrew McGowan, the Dean and President of the Berkeley Divinity School at Yale cites the other theory in his article entitled How December 25 Became Christmas. This theory accounts for the origin of Christmas without any association with pagan roots. He writes:²

There is another way to account for the origins of Christmas on December 25: Strange as it may seem, the key to dating Jesus’ birth may lie in the dating of Jesus’ death at Passover. This view was first suggested to the modern world by French scholar Louis Duchesne in the early 20th century and fully developed by American Thomas Talley in more recent years.⁸ But they were certainly not the first to note a connection between the traditional date of Jesus’ death and his birth.

Around 200 C.E. Tertullian of Carthage reported the calculation that the 14th of Nisan (the day of the crucifixion according to the Gospel of John) in the year Jesus died^c was equivalent to March 25 in the Roman (solar) calendar.⁹ March 25 is, of course, nine months before December 25; it was later recognized as the Feast of the Annunciation—the commemoration of Jesus’ conception.¹⁰ Thus, Jesus was believed to have been conceived and crucified on the same day of the year. Exactly nine months later, Jesus was born, on December 25.^d

This idea appears in an anonymous Christian treatise titled On Solstices and Equinoxes, which appears to come from fourth-century North Africa. The treatise states: “Therefore our Lord was conceived on the eighth of the kalends of April in the month of March [March 25], which is the day of the passion of the Lord and of his conception. For on that day he was conceived on the same he suffered.”¹¹ Based on this, the treatise dates Jesus’ birth to the winter solstice.

Augustine, too, was familiar with this association. In On the Trinity (c. 399–419) he writes: “For he [Jesus] is believed to have been conceived on the 25th of March, upon which day also he suffered; so the womb of the Virgin, in which he was conceived, where no one of mortals was begotten, corresponds to the new grave in which he was buried, wherein was never man laid, neither before him nor since. But he was born, according to tradition, upon December the 25th.”¹²

            So objective research to understand Christ’s birth on December 25^th yields two different results – a popular theory that suggests pagan roots into Christ’s birth and another theory – not popular but certainly doing its rounds in the academic circles, which does not involve any pagan association.

            This is not to claim that Christ most certainly was born on December 25^th. But this is an endeavor to enlighten you that the origin of Christmas has two very different theories. The pagan-association theory is not the only theory.

            Let’s now consider the popular theory that the Christmas celebration has pagan roots and ask the question, ‘So what if Christmas has pagan origins?’ Even if Christmas has pagan roots, should we not celebrate Christmas?

            J. Warner Wallace cites a classic example of the transformation in the message of the cross to claim that we can celebrate Christmas even if it had pagan origins.

            The message of the cross in the Roman period was a symbol of power and authority. But the very same cross is now our symbol of grace and mercy. He writes:³

When we co-opt an ancient celebration, symbol or word and give it a new meaning, we abandon the first meaning in favor of the second…

…consider the cross. In Roman times, the cross was an ugly, brutal instrument of death. The outskirts of large cities were often landscaped with crosses lining the roads to the city. Criminals were brutally executed on these crosses and displayed publicly. The message of the cross was clear. It was a symbol of the power, authority and bloody brutality of the Empire. The cross was filled with meaning in the days before Jesus. But that changed after the resurrection, as Christianity adopted the cross as a new kind of symbol. For Christians, the cross demonstrates the gift of Jesus who died to provide eternal life for all those who believe. For us, the cross symbolizes the sacrifice God made for our sin. The cross has a new meaning we ascribe as believers, superseding the old symbolism of the Roman Empire. The cross is now our symbol of the grace, mercy and gift of God.

That’s what Christmas is for my family. It’s our symbol of the grace, mercy and gift of God. The prior ancient meanings of the holiday don’t matter to me… So, if your family celebrates Christmas and a Christian holiday, enjoy it, even though it’s probably not Jesus’ real birthday.

.           So it does not matter whether Christmas had pagan origins or not. All that matters is the existence of the Historical Jesus is a proven fact. HE did exist, so HIS birth can be celebrated anytime, December 25^th is one such date when we celebrate the birth of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. 

            The Scripture prophesied Jesus' birth, “…an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel” (which means, God with us).” (Matthew 1:20-23, ESV).

            So let’s celebrate Christmas without any qualms. The Lord Jesus is with us.

            May this Christmas season enlighten us more about the living God and HIS Son our Lord Jesus Christ. May HIS power and wisdom be ours as we navigate through very turbulent times. May the Prince of Peace bring the peace of God into your life and mine.

            Merry Christmas!

Endnotes:

¹https://coldcasechristianity.com/writings/enjoy-christmas-tomorrow-even-though-its-probably-not-jesus-birthday/

²https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/jesus-historical-jesus/how-december-25-became-christmas/

³https://coldcasechristianity.com/writings/enjoy-christmas-tomorrow-even-though-its-probably-not-jesus-birthday/

Websites last accessed on December 23^rd 2020.

The Incarnation Of God: The Necessity (What Do We Celebrate At Christmas?)

            What do we really celebrate at Christmas?

            We celebrate the incarnation of God, says R.C Sproul:¹

R.C. Sproul reminds us that what we really celebrate at Christmas is the incarnation of God Himself.

What we celebrate at Christmas is not so much the birth of a baby, as important as that is, but what’s so significant about the birth of that particular baby is that in this birth we have the incarnation of God Himself. An incarnation means a coming in the flesh. We know how John begins His gospel, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” So in that very complicated introductory statement, he distinguishes between the Word and God, and then in the next breath identifies the two, “The Word was with God, and the Word was God.” And then at the end of the prologue, he says, “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.” Now in this “infleshment,” if you will, of Christ appearing on this planet, it’s not that God suddenly changes through a metamorphosis into a man, so that the divine nature sort of passes out of existence or comes into a new form of fleshiness. No, the incarnation is not so much a subtraction as it is an addition, where the eternal second person of the Trinity takes upon Himself a human nature and joins His divine nature to that human nature for the purpose of redemption.

            William Lane Craig’s model for understanding the doctrine of Incarnation is valuable:²

I suggested a model for understanding the doctrine of the incarnation that allows us to affirm the deity and humanity of Christ in a logically coherent way that is also biblically faithful. This model involved, as you recall, three planks. First, that we affirm with the Council of Chalcedon that Christ has two complete natures – human and divine. Secondly, that the soul of the human nature – that body/soul composite that was Jesus of Nazareth – was the second person of the Trinity; it was the Logos. In uniting with the flesh, the Logos brought to the flesh everything needed to complete the human nature and to make it a genuine human being. And then, thirdly, I suggested that we think of the divine elements of Jesus’ consciousness as being largely subliminal during the time of his earthly sojourn. Although on occasion it may have surfaced in consciousness in different ways, for the most part we think of Jesus as having an ordinary human consciousness just like any other human being, and that enables us to explain his growth in wisdom and knowledge, his ignorance of certain facts, the ability of Jesus to feel genuine temptation, the anxieties and struggles that he experienced in life, his need for spiritual discipline and reliance upon his heavenly Father, his prayer life, the struggles in Gethsemane, and so forth. It gives us a realistic portrait of Jesus as we read about him in the Gospels, and yet he was also very much aware of who he was and the divine identity that he possessed at the same time.

            The Incarnation was necessary.

            Thomas Aquinas emphasizes that the Incarnation, a consequence to the human fall, was necessary for God to communicate HIMSELF in the highest manner to HIS creation, namely man.:³

Article 1. Whether it was fitting that God should become incarnate?

Objection 1. It would seem that it was not fitting for God to become incarnate. Since God from all eternity is the very essence of goodness, it was best for Him to be as He had been from all eternity. But from all eternity He had been without flesh. Therefore it was most fitting for Him not to be united to flesh. Therefore it was not fitting for God to become incarnate…

…On the contrary, It would seem most fitting that by visible things the invisible things of God should be made known; for to this end was the whole world made, as is clear from the word of the Apostle (Romans 1:20): "For the invisible things of God . . . are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made." But, as Damascene says (De Fide Orth. iii, 1), by the mystery of Incarnation are made known at once the goodness, the wisdom, the justice, and the power or might of God—"His goodness, for He did not despise the weakness of His own handiwork; His justice, since, on man's defeat, He caused the tyrant to be overcome by none other than man, and yet He did not snatch men forcibly from death; His wisdom, for He found a suitable discharge for a most heavy debt; His power, or infinite might, for there is nothing greater than for God to become incarnate . . ."

…To each things, that is befitting which belongs to it by reason of its very nature; thus, to reason befits man, since this belongs to him because he is of a rational nature. But the very nature of God is goodness, as is clear from Dionysius (Div. Nom. i). Hence, what belongs to the essence of goodness befits God. But it belongs to the essence of goodness to communicate itself to others, as is plain from Dionysius (Div. Nom. iv). Hence it belongs to the essence of the highest good to communicate itself in the highest manner to the creature, and this is brought about chiefly by "His so joining created nature to Himself that one Person is made up of these three—the Word, a soul and flesh," as Augustine says (De Trin. xiii). Hence it is manifest that it was fitting that God should become incarnate.

Article 3. Whether, if man had not sinned, God would have become incarnate?

Objection 1. It would seem that if man had not sinned, God would still have become incarnate. For the cause remaining, the effect also remains. But as Augustine says (De Trin. xiii, 17): "Many other things are to be considered in Incarnation of Christ besides absolution from sin";…Therefore if man had not sinned, God would have become incarnate…

On the contrary, Augustine says (De Verb. Apost. viii, 2), expounding what is set down in Luke 19:10, "For the Son of Man is come to seek and to save that which was lost"; "Therefore, if man had not sinned, the Son of Man would not have come." And on 1 Timothy 1:15, "Christ Jesus came into this world to save sinners," a gloss says, "There was no cause of Christ's coming into the world, except to save sinners. Take away diseases, take away wounds, and there is no need of medicine."

…There are different opinions about this question. For some say that even if man had not sinned, the Son of Man would have become incarnate. Others assert the contrary, and seemingly our assent ought rather to be given to this opinion.

For such things as spring from God's will, and beyond the creature's due, can be made known to us only through being revealed in the Sacred Scripture, in which the Divine Will is made known to us. Hence, since everywhere in the Sacred Scripture the sin of the first man is assigned as the reason of Incarnation, it is more in accordance with this to say that the work of Incarnation was ordained by God as a remedy for sin; so that, had sin not existed, Incarnation would not have been. And yet the power of God is not limited to this; even had sin not existed, God could have become incarnate.

Endnotes:

¹https://www.ligonier.org/blog/incarnation-what-we-celebrate-christmas/

²https://www.reasonablefaith.org/podcasts/defenders-podcast-series-2/s2-doctrine-of-christ/doctrine-of-christ-part-8/

³http://www.newadvent.org/summa/4001.htm#article3

Websites last accessed on 30^th November 2019.

Christmas: A Perfect Portrayal Of God’s Love & Sacrifice

            Christians commemorate three major historical events surrounding the Lord Jesus: Christmas (birth), Good Friday (death) and Easter (resurrection). Although Jesus is the central figure, God’s love and sacrifice is the common denominator of these three events.

            But Christians often tend to overlook God’s love and sacrifice while celebrating Christmas. The reason behind Christ’s birth - Christ was born to die, so to save mankind from their sins - is usually the chief focus during Christmas celebrations.  

God’s Love Led To Christ’s Birth

            Christ was born because of God’s love for mankind. For God so loved the world that HE initiated and fulfilled the program of salvation through Christ - to save man from sins. Since love gains perfection with sacrifice, God sent the second person of the blessed Trinity, the Lord Jesus, to die, resurrect and ascend into heaven (thereby those who believe in Christ would be saved from their sins).  

            God’s love for mankind could be best remembered and accentuated if we consider the Historic Christian doctrine of salvation in comparison with the competing doctrines. God’s love for mankind is best displayed in the doctrine of salvation of the Historic Christian worldview.

            The competing doctrines of salvation fail to display God’s love for mankind. God can only be a loving being. If any doctrine portrays God as not a loving being, then that doctrine cannot be true.

            For instance, God cannot be a loving being, if he mandates man to do good works to attain salvation. Similarly, God cannot be a loving being, if HE would eventually save all of mankind, irrespective of their belief or disbelief in HIM.

Salvation By Works: Cannot Be A Loving God’s Salvific Program

            It is well within God’s perfect and infinite knowledge and power to devise other means of salvation (other than the death of Christ on the cross of Calvary) to save man from his sins. For instance, God could have mandated man to do good works to be saved.

            But God would have passed the buck to man had HE mandated man to do good works to attain salvation. God, who creates man, should own the sole or the primary responsibility to save the man. But if God’s mandate was for man to do good works to be saved, the responsibility of being saved would have shifted from the domain of God to the domain of man.

            Only an unloving and an unjust God could have executed the salvific program of the man doing good works to be saved. No one is perfect in doing good works, for we can never be immune to sin or imperfections. Man is always prone to sin. Hence, doing good works to utter perfection is impossible for man. Every good deed that we perform will always be tarnished by our bad deeds.

            But an argument predicated on the grading system in pedagogy could be posited. God could save man based on his performance of doing good works in life. In other words, those who ‘Fail’ in God’s salvific scrutiny would not be saved, whereas those who ‘Pass’ (by exceeding God’s expectations) would be saved.

            Even then, had God instituted a plan of salvation-by-works, HE could be blamed endlessly.

            Had God not created man with an innate inclination towards imperfection, it may be plausible to not blame God. But man is not perfect; he has a natural propensity to imperfection (sin). Hence God could be blamed. Every good work that man performs could be questioned and every good work could be improved upon.

            This problem is compounded by the fact that God does not create people uniformly (physical, mental, emotional etc.). For instance, not all people are created with the same IQ.

            In order to be saved, the man ought to adequately comprehend God’s plan for salvation so that he can consistently perform good works. But a man with an average or a low IQ would naturally struggle to assimilate God and HIS plan to save him, thereby this man can come up short while performing good deeds. If this is the case, how could God not be blamed, for man is HIS creation?

            Abnormalities exist in mankind. Hence, people with average or below-average physical, mental and emotional capabilities would perform deeds differently, let alone good or bad.

            Defining good and bad is also not a simple task. A terrorist thinks he is performing a good deed when he kills his enemy. But those being killed by this terrorist consider him as an evil human being. Similarly, a parent punishing the child could either be termed good or bad based on the differing perspectives of the parent and the child. If defining good and evil is a complicated process, then performing good deeds would naturally be more complicated and contentious.

            On the other hand, if God lowers HIS expectations for man, so to compensate for HIS unequal creation of man, God’s justice could be questioned, which would then lead to questioning HIS very essence as the greatest conceivable being. God cannot be the greatest conceivable being if HE is unjust.

            When God creates people with abnormalities, they cannot perform good deeds consistently. More importantly, mandating man to do good works when God creates man with severe abnormalities, projects God as an unjust being. But the greatest conceivable being cannot be unjust so God could not have instituted a program of salvation by good works. Therefore, a loving and a just God cannot expect the man to do good works in order to gain salvation.  

Universal Salvation: A Loving God Will Not Save All Men

            Another contradicting doctrine on salvation is that of universal salvation – that everyone would be saved. But universal salvation cannot be sustained without demeaning God.

            God cannot be a loving God if HE is unjust (an imperfect being cannot be God). So this doctrine of salvation would crumble because a good and a loving God could not have instituted a horrendous program to save the man.

            If universal salvation has any merit, the notion of good and evil or right and wrong should not be in existence. But as long as good and evil exists, universal salvation cannot be God’s program to save man, for universal salvation posits God saving both the good and the unrepentant evil.

            If God saves both the good and the evil, either God should be evil or morality should cease to exist. But God cannot be evil, for the greatest conceivable being cannot be evil. Moreover, there is good and evil in our world. Therefore, it is impossible for God to save both the good and the evil.

            Consider a man who is innately corrupt – a man who cheats, maims and murders innocent people so to gain wealth and power. How could such a man be saved unless he repents of his wrongdoings and reforms his life? But universal salvation posits salvation for such a man despite his unrepentant life.

            Consider those who curse God. Militant atheists fall into this category. If a man who curses God dies without repenting (many atheists have died such a death), and if God saves such a man, then this implies that God deserves no respect or reverence.

            God cannot be revered or respected if HE saves those who perennially curse HIM. If God encourages people to not respect and revere HIM, HE cannot be God, to begin with. Such a God cannot be in existence.

            God, as the greatest conceivable being, should be worshipped in awe and reverence. God is holy; hence HE deserves to be worshipped. But if God saves those who perennially curse HIM, the implication is that HE does not demand worship (because men would still be saved without worshipping God).

            A God who does not demand worship cannot be a holy or a loving God. Hence this God cannot be in existence. Therefore, the program of universal salvation bites the dust. God could not have instituted such a program to save the man.

Christmas: God’s Love & Sacrifice

            Christmas is all about God’s love and sacrifice.

            Christ’s birth demonstrates God’s love for mankind. Love is always unconditional. So God became man and placed HIMSELF under the power of evil to brutally suffer and die for us. God’s sacrifice on the cross of Calvary demonstrates HIS love for mankind.

            Christ’s birth also signifies God assuming the primary responsibility to save the man. Christ died for us while we were still sinners. The all-loving God sent HIS Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, to sacrifice HIMSELF for the sake of mankind. Thereby, all those who believe in Christ are saved.

            We celebrate Christmas to thank God for Christ’s birth. But to think of Christ’s birth without recognizing God’s love and sacrifice is to disregard the true meaning behind of the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ.

            So when we celebrate Christmas, let us remember God’s love and sacrifice, and let us love each other by sacrificing our needs so to satisfy the needs of those around us – our families, friends, and even those whom we do not know.

            Enjoy a Christ-filled Christmas season! 

Celebrating Christmas The Biblical Way

            Decorating homes, distributing goodies, get-together with friends and family, and getting drunk are some of our favorite means to celebrate Christmas. Over the years we have been habituated to practice these celebration routines. But are we celebrating Christmas the right way – the Biblical way? Is there a biblical way to celebrate Christmas?

            The Bible reveals the birth of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. So it is plausible that the Bible also reveals the manner in which we should celebrate the birth of our Lord.

Unbelief to Belief

            The gospel of Matthew reveals Joseph’s transformation from unbelief to belief. Prior to the revelation of Christ’s birth, Joseph planned to divorce Mary. But after Christ’s birth was revealed to him, he believed the message of Christ’s birth and took Mary as his wife, “This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. Because Joseph her husband was faithful to the law, and yet did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly. But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.”…When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife.” (Matthew 1: 18 - 24, NIV, Emphasis Mine).

            Believing in the Lord Jesus Christ as your God and Savior is the most appropriate way to celebrate Christmas.

Bless God: Praise & Glorify HIM

            The sight of the child Jesus in the temple invoked Simeon to bless God, but what does it mean to bless God? Pastor John Piper expounds the meaning of blessing God, “My thesis is that in the Scripture when God "blesses" men they are thereby helped and strengthened and made better off than they were before, but when men "bless" God he is not helped or strengthened or made better off. Rather (with C. A. Keller in THAT, I, 361) man's blessing God is an "expression of praising Thankfulness" (ein lobendes Danksagen), when the OT speaks of blessing God it does not "designate a pro­cess that aims at the increase of God's strength" (THAT, I, 361). It is an "exclamation of gratitude and admiration" (THAT, I, 357)…They do not mean that we make God larger or higher. So to bless God means to recognize his great richness, strength, and gracious bounty and to express our gratitude and delight in seeing and experiencing it.”¹

            J.I Packer in his most famous work, “Knowing God,” explains that to bless God is to praise, exalt and worship HIM. When we praise, adore, thank and love God, we are in fact blessing God.

            The shepherds, after having seen the birth of the Lord, praised and glorified God, for what they saw was what was told to them, “The shepherds went back, glorifying and praising God for all that they had heard and seen, just as had been told them.” (Luke 2: 20, NASB).

            Similarly, every aspect of our Christmas celebration ought to praise and glorify God. In other words, drunkenness as a means of celebrating Christmas is not an option for Christians.

            Significantly, we cannot bless God if we do not know HIM. Simeon knew God well; HE was able to recognize the precious Holy Spirit’s voice in HIM that directed him to the child Jesus. Likewise, this Christmas, let us desire to grow in our knowledge of God. One lifetime is not enough to know God. So let us make the best use of our life by knowing God.

Go Tell It

            The gospel of Luke includes the narrative of the angels revealing the birth of our Lord to the shepherds. The shepherds responded to the birth of our Lord Jesus by spreading the news of Christ’s birth, “When they had seen this, they made known the statement which had been told them about this Child.” (Luke 2: 17, NASB).

            Similarly, we are to spread the word of Christ’s birth to all in our domain. Caroling is a wonderful means to spread the news of Christ’s birth to unbelievers. Moreover, the Christmas season offers us a grand opportunity to invite our non-Christian friends into our homes to celebrate the birth of Christ.

Fulfillment of Hope

            The narrative of Simeon’s encounter with child Jesus emphasizes another interesting phenomenon. For Simeon, the sight of child Jesus was the fulfillment of his hope in God, “Now, according to your word, Sovereign Lord, permit your servant to depart in peace. For my eyes have seen your salvation that you have prepared in the presence of all peoples: a light, for revelation to the Gentiles, and for glory to your people Israel.” (Luke 2:29-32, NET).

            Hope is the only lifeline for many around us. They hope for a better life – spiritually and materially. This Christmas, may we be the channels of blessing for them to realize their hope.

            God will certainly fulfill our hope in HIM. The greatest hope we have in God is for us to spend our life with HIM unto all eternity. God will most certainly fulfill this hope when we believe and remain in Christ always. May our celebrations reflect our hope in God.

Conclusion

            If our Christmas is all about decorating our homes, distributing goodies and meeting family and friends without blessing God, sharing HIM with others, praising and glorifying HIM, and being a channel of blessing those who are deprived, then our Christmas celebrations cannot be biblically appropriate.

            This Christmas

            Believe in Christ

            Bless HIM

            Share HIM

            Grow in HIM

            Fulfill the hope of the deprived

            And know that HE will fulfill our hope in HIM.

            I pray that you and your family enjoy a blessed Christmas.

Endnotes:

¹http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/what-does-it-mean-to-bless-god (last accessed on 22^nd December 2016.)  

Black, Blacker & Blackest Christmas (Every Christmas Is Black)

            The first Christmas was a black Christmas. Lamentation, weeping and great mourning accompanied Christ’s birth; children aged two years and under were ruthlessly massacred by King Herod.

            Today, Christmas is a joyful celebration. Churches and homes are colorfully decorated, joyful carols are sung and nativity scenes are enacted. Businesses enjoy the fruit of their labor; Christmas season fetches increased revenue. Christmas is all about goodness - good cheer, good food, and good company.

            The darkness that clouded the first Christmas has been successfully erased. Is Christmas trending in the right direction?

            Those asserting that Christmas is trending right would cite Christ as the greatest gift for the salvation of those who believe in HIM. Quite rightly so!

            For if God had not sent Christ into this world to save us, perhaps we would have been doomed to doing good works to earn our salvation. But doing good works can never be an option if God, a perfect being, is involved in the equation.

            Sin, an entailment of freewill, is innate in every human. So doing good works cannot be done to perfection. If good works cannot be done to perfection, salvation would perennially be uncertain.

            A maximally great being is perfect. An imperfect being cannot be maximally great. Completeness is innate in perfection, for perfection cannot be incomplete. In other words, corruption of any magnitude cannot partake in perfection.

            From a salvific perspective, God, the only perfect being, should demand existential perfection from HIS creation for coexistence in eternity. But humans cannot be existentially perfect because of our sinfulness. So our good works can never be perfect to meet God’s perfect standards. Therefore, God ought to make a way to enable sinful humans attain perfection.

            Salvation entails eternal coexistence. Heaven, the eternal abode for God and Christians, is perfect, for God can only exist in a perfect abode. But a perfect being cannot coexist, face to face (so to speak) with imperfect beings in a perfect abode. God can only coexist, face to face, with perfect beings in the perfect heaven.

            Perfection in an imperfect being could only be achieved by an uncaused perfect being, who is, in essence, a wholly perfect being (and there cannot be more than one uncaused wholly perfect being).

            Hence, God sent HIS son, the second person of the blessed Trinity, the Lord Jesus Christ to be a perfect one-time sacrifice for the salvation of all mankind. Therefore, Christians, who believe in Christ as God and remain in HIM, will attain perfect glorious bodies after their death. This is a matter of great celebration. No doubts! So celebration during Christmas cannot be invalidated.

            But is Christmas trending in the right direction?

            While celebrating joyfully with our families and friends, are we ignoring the more important aspects of life? Although Christmas celebration cannot be faulted altogether, is our Christmas celebration qualitatively meeting God’s expectations?

            What does God expect of our Christmas celebration? What does the Bible teach us?

            The Bible mandates love. Love is the common denominator between God and man – God loved us while we were sinners to offer us salvation through Christ, and man should love God for who HE is and what HE has done.

            But that’s not it! True love for God is discerned in our love for our neighbors.

            So what would Christ want us to do during Christmas season? Very minimally, preach the gospel and help those in need.

            If our celebrations do not, in greater part, involve those in pain and need, then their Christmas would continue to be a black Christmas. If people around us remain in pain and suffering, then our celebrations would remain duplicitous.

            Christmas 2015 will be a black Christmas for many people around us. Their pain and suffering renders this Christmas black. Can we reduce the intensity of their pain and suffering through our love?

            Unless our neighbor’s suffering is predicated on money, it would be impossible to erase their suffering. God alone can erase suffering predicated on emotional turmoil and illness.

            But it is well within our means to erase our neighbor’s need for money. Some of us are charitable in nature and could well be helping those in financial need. But are we giving from our abundance or poverty?!

            In other words, are we giving till it hurts? Do we practice the “grace of giving” (cf. 2 Corinthians 8: 1-7)? While striving to alleviate poverty around us, unless we personally experience the pain of poverty, even to the slightest measure, through our giving, our giving would not meet God’s expectations. Unless our financial giving hurts us or unless we give beyond our ability, may we never be satisfied with our giving.

            This Christmas would be a blacker Christmas for those staggering under emotional turmoil. Many life situations cause emotional turmoil e.g. death of a loved one, conflict, failure etc.

            What could be done to alleviate their pain? Genuine and godly words and deeds of comfort and encouragement would offer our brothers and sisters much needed satisfaction that there are people who genuinely care for them.

            The blackest of black Christmas is reserved to those staggering under the effects of evil, pain and suffering in their lives but convinced with the intellectual answer to the question “Where is God when it hurts?” However, no amount of intellectual knowledge or consent to reasonable answers heals the deep wounds caused by evil; such is evil’s gory.

            Healing would only occur when evil in its crushing glory is eliminated from life and blessings are outpoured. Job’s life was a good example.

            But what if there is no healing in this life?

            So isn’t there a merry Christmas at all?                     

            Every Christmas is black

            Evil and suffering do not lack

            God mysteriously comes along

            Shows us HIS nail pierced hands which should have been ours all along

            I AM Immanuel, I AM with you, HE says

            Patience, strength and wisdom HE gives us to slay

            The darkness in Christmas

            When we pray HE floods us

            With peace amid pain, this Christmas

            For HE is Immanuel, God with us.