Let me offer a belated clarification.

In your example of a convention you would have a gathering of families who would in some areas place themselves under an authority of those hosting the convention. A convention has no legal governing ability outside of the “rules of the convention”. The family, the church, and civil government have permanent jurisdictions.

If a father disagrees with the “rules of the convention” he can remove his family from that convention. This is not the case in these biblical governments. To the idea of marriage, here is a great article addressing the issue of state issued marriage license:

http://www.lesriley.net/MT_5reasons.htm

On your other point, I apparently failed to make clear the distinction between your example and mine.

Nadab and Abihu died because they did something that God did not command them to do regarding an act of worship.

David did something he was commanded not to do, but it was a matter of saving his life… not an act of worship to God.

The distinction is the act of worship, not simply the command to do something or not to do something.

My perspective is to not try to explain the non-normative examples that we see occasionally in scripture. But to examine the whole of scriptures in context to determine the principles we live by.

We see an example of David being required to deliver 300 foreskins from the enemy before he could marry. This is not something we would use as a normal requirement for marriage.

In this light, the principles that guide our understanding of our modern holiday called christmas is what I address in this post.

Here are a few that should be considered in relation to christmas.

1) The creature is not free to define how he will worship the Creator. Christ never commanded us to keep the (supposed) day of his birth holy.

2) Neither the state nor the church have the authority to sanction a religious holiday, with the exception of days of thanksgiving and fasting, which I’ve already mentioned.

3) The foundation of christmas is the birth of Christ, therefore it is religious at its core.

4) Historically the protestant churches and members did not celebrate christmas until the early 1800s.

Lastly, I’ve condemned no one. All I have said is that as for me and my house this is what we will practice. I have asked people to consider these things. That act itself is against the grain of our modern culture. But, I have stated that there is grace and I understand it is difficult to take a contrary position on such an emotional topic.

At the end of the day, while I can love my brothers who disagree with me on this issue, I cannot follow their logic in doing so. I’ve asked for a sound biblical argument to celebrate christmas and so far no one has been able to present one.

I don’t think, David eating showbread or claiming it is just a time of remembering and being thankful, are arguments that ar sufficient for passing this ritual on to my children.

A group of believers . . . is a church? I know we are wandering but I am curious . . . do you believe a “seminar” or a “convention” to be a church, or do you believe that such gatherings are illegitimate? Is a wedding a “family”, “church” or a “government” gathering? Since jurisdictions are so clear, as you say, it is emphatically one or the other . . .

>Purim was a civil holiday.. a day of thanksgiving,
>which I fully embrace as did the founding fathers, as
>a legitimate civil action.

As indicated, Christmas was always for us a day of thanksgiving to God for the incarnation. So, from your comments, I gather you would allow that as a legitimate holiday for those that fall in that category. Or . . . do you believe that Jews who practiced Purim over the centuries without a government were in error?

>The issue with the priest was not a violation of a
>command, it was specifically doing something they
>were not commanded.

>David and the showbread is a non normative example.
>No one else ever ate the showbread that we know of,
>because of the prohibitions against it.

Do you see the problem? This is a contradition. You say that Nadab and Abihu died because they did something God commanded them to . . . yet David is commended for doing something God did not command him to - or, actually, commanded him not to. Naaman did something God specifically commanded him not to . . . and Elisha said, “Go in peace”.

Luke 6:4 How he went into the house of God, and did take and eat the shewbread, and gave also to them that were with him; which it is not lawful to eat but for the priests alone?

God specifically gave authority only to the priests to eat the shewbread.

Exodus 20:5 “Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them”"

God specifically commanded to not bow down before idols.

So . . . even if Christmas were bowing down to idols, whatever gave legitimacy to Naaman’s act of bowing down before his master’s idol also applies to the believer. Same principle as eating meat literally offered to a literal idol . . . which Paul said was fine because “an idol is nothing”. Even though God specifically commanded such meat not to be eaten and had, up to that point, said nothing about eating idol meat to Christians (and they were already clearly doing it).

Your perspective of what makes an action legitimate cannot explain these things. Which is why, I believe, you may be inclined, as the Saviour said, to “condemn the guiltless” with regard to Christmas.

With love in our Savior,

-Alfred

I haven’t much time to respond thoroughly, but I can say that we disagree from our foundations.

First whenever a “group of believers” does anything it falls under one of the governments that God has created or it is not a legitimate gathering to begin with. He established, family, church, and civil government. Either this group is a group of families, or it is a church, or it is a political body. He gives jurisdiction to each of these.

Purim was a civil holiday.. a day of thanksgiving, which I fully embrace as did the founding fathers, as a legitimate civil action.

The issue with the priest was not a violation of a command, it was specifically doing something they were not commanded.

David and the showbread is a non normative example. No one else ever ate the showbread that we know of, because of the prohibitions against it.

If I’m under an ungodly authority, I’m to obey God rather than man. Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, Rehab, the Hebrew midwives, Paul and Silas in Jail for Preaching against the commands of the authority they were under.

Lastly, those who lose their children to the world, did not have their children’s heart. It is not a stand against Christmas that drives children away, it is not being able to reach the heart of the children and properly disciple them, by instilling a vision for Christ and his Kingdom advancing upon the earth that causes children to rebel against their parents.

Even that is an over simplification of a relationship that has been ongoing for 15-20 year by the time most children rebel. There are many things that cause children to rebel, but all of them have more to do with the relationship with their parents than the beliefs of their parents.

but if it were true, if we could keep our children, by disobeying the scriptures, where does our duty lie? Now that’s a tough question.

Thank you for your comments. I appreciate the heart behind what you have to say, but again I believe we are starting with a different foundation to come to agreement on this topic. For me, based on my understanding of the principles taught in the Scripture, God alone established how he will be worship. The creature is not free to decide how he will worship the Creator. He is only free to be obedient to the patterns and commands established in the scriptures.

In Christ, the King of all kings.

You would need to establish that. “One eateth herbs”, for example, has nothing to do with Jews or the Law of Moses . . . right? Paul did not qualify his direction . . . would apply, for example, to those that practice Saturday as a day of rest . . . and those who feel at perfect liberty to vigorously serve the Lord any day of the week.

We are not talking about civil government or the church (government) establishing anything. We are talking about groups of believers observing a “holy convocation” as a remembrance, much as the Jews (not the Lord) established Purim. While the Lord did not command it, He also did not prohibit it.

>

“In Spirit and in Truth” is what He said. What else do you read?

>

A violation of a specific commandment to the priests . . . I can’t think of a comperable commandment to deny Christmas . . . can you?

>

Again a clear violation of a clear command.

But . . . now . . . let us consider even that for a moment. Since God specifically commanded that only priests were to eat of the shewbread, what gave David the right to eat, let alone get the Savior’s blessing?

How about those idols? What if I were under an authority that literally worshipped an idol and I were asked to assist him in observing “worship” days, would I not, out of respect and love for that authority, i.e. a “higher principle”, have the privilege, in fact the responsibility, to do so? Deliberately allowing a violation of a clear command (which Christmas is not) out of honor and love for those God has called me to serve.

How about those gifts? “The poor have you always with you - Me ye have not always” is a broad principle. It allows senseless financial waste in some instances where love is involved. We do not always have the children with us either. Those that despise (careful choice of words) Christmas tend to lose their children to the world, or their children start to practice Christmas. Interesting observation - I have watched this over several generations. Have you seen otherwise?

Food for thought . . .

With love in our Savior,

-Alfred

I hear your heart, but the scripture reference your friend mentioned was specifically talking about the difference between the Jewish calendar and new Christian converts. It in no way gives the church or the civil government the authority to establish a religious day of worship.

Please hear me, there is much room for grace in this area. I worship with some dear friends who hold a different view than I do. They may take liberty and say that a father has a duty to train his children and establishing certain days for remembrance is an authority that is granted to the father. I would agree with that principle, but its suspicious that the day he picks just happens to be December 25th.

My main point of contention with Christmas is that God alone defines how we are to worship him, whether it is in the corporate assembly or in our private homes, and he has never commanded that we should celebrate a day that some call his birthday.

A couple scriptures that I think more properly addresses the issue of Christmas are:

Lev 10:1-2 And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the LORD, which he commanded them not. And there went out fire from the LORD, and devoured them, and they died before the LORD.

Jer 32:35 And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

The commercial aspects of Christmas came out of the English traditions. The Germans (my heritage) celebrated this as a holy day . . . indeed, Christmas Eve is called “Heiligabend”, or “Holy Evening”. In my home growing up it was a quiet, solemn time and the story of Luke 2 was reverently read and discussed . . . followed, of course, by gift giving, much in line with Scriptures such as Nehemiah 8:10 and Esther 9:19.

In conclusion, a dear old preacher amongst our “Plymouth Brethren” circles (which have a clear public stance against Christmas) spoke once how the Lord had spoken to him about that through Romans 14:5-6, causing him to stop preaching against Christmas observance:

“One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it.”

With love in our Savior,

-Alfred

We have been working through the issues surrounding this time of year for several years ourselves.

We have not drawn a hard line in the sand with anyone over it. But we have made it a point to avoid any celebration of this day for the above mentioned reasons.

We have always put a large focus on the beginning of a new year and as such we invite others who normally have the time off work to come and join us on that occasion. We enjoy the fellowship and spending time with family, but without all the baggage of this particular holiday.

Keep searching the scriptures and keep reforming!