The Origins of our Christmas Traditions

Hi Doug,

I have never been to the Grand Rapids Church. Do you ever make it to the Dells for the feast?

I have been reading topcat54's posts and I can't figure out how they can attach God's Holy Days to the Levitical
Priesthood. Can you explain topcat54's logic for me?

Doesn't he know that the Feast of Tabernacles will be even observed in the future (Zechariah 14:16)?

I have never been to the Grand Rapids Church. Do you ever make it to the Dells for the feast?

Two out of the last three years...:-)

Can't really talk a lot and I'll be off the internet the for the next few days...we're leaving for Louisville this morning..see you when I get back!

You are correct about the high priests, circumcision and sacrifices. all of these are scripturally specified...or rather clarified.. But annual feast days are not. For example, the bread and wine did not "replace" Passover. In the bible, these were new symbols that beome associated with the yearly festival of Passover. Christ tells us do them in remembrance of him on the Passover because that is the day he he was killed on. It is only by tradition that hardly anyone performs this memorial service on Passover.

Well, if you care to address my other issues then we can discuss the matter further.

How can you call whatever is done today as "passover" when it does not follow the specific requirements in the word of God for what constitutes a biblical passover?

Jesus ended passover as it was described in the Bible because it was unique to the people of the older covenant, and it was simply a means to point to the Messiah (1 Cor. 5:7). Passover became the universal celebation of the Lord's Supper that was not tied to any one people or location (John 4:21). There is no record in the NT after the resurrection of the church keeping the Jewish passover. The pattern became a regular (weekly) breaking of bread in the Lord's Supper.

The fact is today all that is celebrated is a pretend passover.

If you can address that biblically then we can proceed.

The new covenant altered how the feast days are kept, but never said that the feast days are done away with.

This is a wild explanation; God did away with all the details of the feast days but not the feast days themselves. And He left no instructions on how there were to be celebrated once all the details were eliminated. Why would any rational person believe this? It's absolutely unsupported from Scripture.

You expect us to believe that when Paul speaks of these things as "shadows" that that opens the gate for continued observance? A "shadow" of what? Well, Christ, obviously from the context. But yet you are expecting that we play in the "shadow" when Christ Himself has come and "fulfilled all righteousness"?

And this "anti-semitism" charge against the early church really wears thin after a while. The fact is the early church did not observe all these Jewish feast days because they were just that, purely Jewish feast days limited to the times and places of national Israel. National Israel passed away from God's economy in the 1st century. The Church became God's new "holy nation" (1 Peter 2:9,10), and the rites of the new (universal) Israel were no longer tied to places and annual days.

Again, you can pretent to keep these days, but the fact remains that modern observance of these days is a human tradition (often rabbinic) with humanly inspired trappings. Take "passover" for example, apart from eating the bread and drinking the cup that is commanded in keeping of the Lord's Supper, what do you do on your "passover" that is commanded in the Bible?

How can you call whatever is done today as "passover" when it does not follow the specific requirements in the word of God for what constitutes a biblical passover?

Under the new covenant there are no requirements for animal sacrifices. Hebrews chapter 10 covers this extensively. With that understanding there is no animal sacrifice required. Likewise physical circumcision under the new covenant is not a requirement, although circumcision is still a requirement...only now it's a circumcision of the heart. This isn't really new either

Deu 10:16 Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked.

The sign of acceptance of the new covenant is baptism. Therefore unbaptized people (uncircumcised spiritually) people shouldn't partake in the bread and wine of passover.

Jesus also commanded his disciples to break bread and drink the wine in remembrance of him. He did this on Passover. He died on Passover. Passover is a yearly reminder, a memorial, of the death of Christ:

1Co 11:23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread;
1Co 11:24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me."
1Co 11:25 In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me."

Jesus ended passover as it was described in the Bible because it was unique to the people of the older covenant, and it was simply a means to point to the Messiah (1 Cor. 5:7).

This simply doesn't hold up biblically. Christ never stated that Passover was done away with. On the contrary, God almighty chose the day of Passover as the day of his death. AND commanded us to observe it. It is memorial, a remembrance, of the sacrifice of Christ.

Passover became the universal celebation of the Lord's Supper that was not tied to any one people or location (John 4:21).

The Lord's supper evolved from the passover rites instituted by Christ. It's certainly tied to Christians, but true not in any one place.

There is no record in the NT after the resurrection of the church keeping the Jewish passover.

The Jewish Passover differs from the Christian Passover because Jews don't accept the new covenant. Paul makes it clear that Christians kept the feast of Passover in biblical times:

1Co 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
1Co 5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened [bread] of sincerity and truth.

Paul, in the holy bible, the word of God, specifically instructs Christians to keep the feast of Passover and unleavened bread. By tradition, that has been undone by most of Christianity.

You expect us to believe that when Paul speaks of these things as "shadows" that that opens the gate for continued observance? A "shadow" of what? Well, Christ, obviously from the context. But yet you are expecting that we play in the "shadow" when Christ Himself has come and "fulfilled all righteousness"?

Paul said specifically that all feast days ARE shadows. There is plenty of information on the web about what these days signify.

Here are some references I found helpful when reserarching them:

Feast Days of the God of Israel

Biblical Holidays

God's Holy Day Plan

And this "anti-semitism" charge against the early church really wears thin after a while. The fact is the early church did not observe all these Jewish feast days because they were just that, purely Jewish feast days limited to the times and places of national Israel.

As celebrated by Jews, yes. As celebrated by Christians, no. And the anti-semitism of the early church is well documented and is a historical fact. I'm sorry if you believe otherwise.

Take "passover" for example, apart from eating the bread and drinking the cup that is commanded in keeping of the Lord's Supper, what do you do on your "passover" that is commanded in the Bible?

The biblical commandments of Christ are these:

Luk 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake [it], and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
Luk 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup [is] the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

Paul clarifies how they (the bread and wine) are to be taken:

1Co 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink [this] cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
1Co 11:28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of [that] bread, and drink of [that] cup.
1Co 11:29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

Christ also specifically instructed his disciples to perform another rite on Passover, the day he died:

Joh 13:14 If I then, [your] Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another's feet.
Joh 13:15 For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.

The sign of acceptance of the new covenant is baptism. Therefore unbaptized people (uncircumcised spiritually) people shouldn't partake in the bread and wine of passover.

You've had to change God's requirments for passover in order to satisfy your human traditions.

God said that only the physically circumcised could partake of the biblical passover. God never changed that requirement.

What God did was to replace the jewish passover with the universal Lord's Supper. That is how Paul refers to it among the Church at Corinth. He never calls it passover. No one ever calls the Lord's Supper "passover". "Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord's Supper," (1 Cor. 11:20) The fact is that passover was merely a type of Christ. "Clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump, just as you are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed." (1 Cor. 5:7)

The Jewish Passover differs from the Christian Passover because Jews

There is no Christian passover. That's a myth. Christ is our passover. The feast we keep is the Lord's Supper in remembrance of Him.

"Take "passover" for example, apart from eating the bread and drinking the cup that is commanded in keeping of the Lord's Supper, what do you do on your "passover" that is commanded in the Bible?"

The biblical commandments of Christ are these:

What you have described is the Lord's Supper, not passover. It's obvious that even you know that passover was a mere shadow, a tpe of Christ, that has passed away with the old covenant.

I find the myriad of opinions on the religious threads to be mind-boggling. In any case, given the weather in Northern Europe (and my own area of the northern US), I can't think of a better time to celebrate the birth of the Saviour: when the world turns dark and depressing and frightening, when the cold seeps into your bones, that's when humanity feels an innate need for light and to worship the Light of the World: Jesus Christ.

I can't think of a better time to celebrate the birth of the Saviour:

That's generally what Christians do every week, not just once a year.

Christmas

"The Word became Flesh and made His dwelling among us, and we have seen His glory: The glory of an only Son coming from the Father, filled with enduring love." (John 1:14)

The actual date of Christ’s birth is unknown. The Gospels do not record it and there is not any early tradition to identify it. Scholars identify the approximate year as sometime between 8 - 5 BC and the season as probably early spring. The feast day was placed where it was, in all likelihood, to supplant the practice of the winter solstice festival among pagan converts by pointing to Christ as the true light who comes into the world. The Western Church emphasizes the celebration of the Nativity or Birth of Jesus on December 25, while the Eastern Church celebrates His manifestation to the Magi on the Feast of the Epiphany, January 6.

The word Christmas was derived from the Old English Cristes Maesse or "Mass of Christmas." Over the centuries it has become a comprehensive word including both the religious traditions and the secular traditions.

In North America, the early immigrants brought their different Christmas traditions. The Germans brought the Christmas tree, the Irish contributed the lights in windows of homes, Catholic immigrants brought Midnight Mass and everyone had their own Christmas carols.

The Lights of Christmas

The most obvious symbol of Christmas are lights – Christmas candles, window lights, luminaries, lights on the Advent Wreath and Christmas tree. All signifying that Jesus Christ is the Light of the world.

Christmas Candle

The Christmas candle is an ancient tradition. It is usually placed in the center of the Advent Wreath to complete the removal of darkness and sin by the Coming of Christ.

Window Lights

Lights placed inside window sills depict a beacon to light the way for Mary, Joseph, and the coming of the Christ Child.

Christmas Tree

Christmas trees can be found almost anywhere, any size. For many people, the Christmas tree is only a seasonal decoration. To Christians it symbolizes the green of hope at a time of dying, the burning light of Christ at a time of spiritual darkness and the fruits of paradise. Its origin as a Christian symbol may trace to an historical event. When St. Boniface evangelized the Germanic tribes he chopped down their sacred oak to prove the impotence of their god. Just as Patrick used the shamrock as a symbol of the Trinity, Boniface used the evergreen as a symbol of the eternity of the true God. The Church provides a blessing ceremony in its Book of Blessings for use in the absence of a priest.

Holly

The appearance of holly is representative of the burning bush of Moses and Mary’s burning love of for God. The red berries and prickly points are symbolic of the crown of thorns and the bloody death that the Christ Child would eventually suffer.

Poinsettia

Poinsettias are associated with Christmas as the lily is with Easter. In Mexico it blooms at Christmas time and is called the "Flower of the Holy Night." Its name is from the first U.S. ambassador to Mexico, Dr. Joel Poinsett.

That's generally what Christians do every week, not just once a year.

Not really. We celebrate the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ and His atoning work of salvation for our sins. But as for celebrating His actual birth, we don't generally read Micah 5:2 every week of the year.

You've had to change God's requirments for passover in order to satisfy your human traditions. God said that only the physically circumcised could partake of the biblical passover. God never changed that requirement.

If you believe the New Testament is inspired scripture then you know that physical circumcision is not a requirement for the people of God:

Col 3:11 Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond [nor] free: but Christ [is] all, and in all.

Col 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

Gal 6:15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.

Gal 5:6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.

This was a huge, biblically documented issue in the early church. Acts 15 details the controvery. The biblical, Christian church decided that physical circumcision was not a requirement for salvation through Christ.

It is very true and still is that an uncircumcised person can't participate in the Jewish Passover, but when Paul commanded Christians to keep the feast of Passover and Unleavened bread there was no way that he was excluding uncircumcised gentiles.

What God did was to replace the jewish passover with the universal Lord's Supper.

God showed in the bible what Passover really signified...the death of Christ. Christ insituted the symbols of passover, the bread and wine, and commanded his followers to partake of them in remembrance of him.

That is how Paul refers to it among the Church at Corinth. He never calls it passover. No one ever calls the Lord's Supper "passover". "

I'm saying Christ instituted the symbols of bread and wine ON passover and commanded his followers to remember him, to follow in his steps.

There is no Christian passover. That's a myth. Christ is our passover. The feast we keep is the Lord's Supper in remembrance of Him.

As I see it you can go one of two ways. You can acknowledge that the Roman church has authority over you and celebrate it in the way that they proscribed hundreds of years after the death of Christ...or you can follow the example of Christ in the bible and celebrate Passover the same way he did and commanded us to.

What you have described is the Lord's Supper, not passover. It's obvious that even you know that passover was a mere shadow, a tpe of Christ, that has passed away with the old covenant.

Obviously I'm too simple minded to understand this revelation....:-)

If you believe the New Testament is inspired scripture then you know that physical circumcision is not a requirement for the people of God:

Under the new covenant, that is true. But passover was an ordinance of the old covenant. It was a blood ordinance. One participated by the shedding of blood.

Under the new covenant the bloody passover has been replaced by the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, where we remember His death not with the shedding of blood, but with the sacramentals of bread (body) and wine (blood) of Christ.

It is very true and still is that an uncircumcised person can't participate in the Jewish Passover, but when Paul commanded Christians to keep the feast of Passover and Unleavened bread there was no way that he was excluding uncircumcised gentiles.

The fact remains that there is no biblical evidence of a new testament "passover" where the physically uncircumcised were permitted to participate. Paul and the others referred to the Christian ordinance as the Lord's Supper, not passover. That you cannot disprove.

Under the new covenant, that is true. But passover was an ordinance of the old covenant. It was a blood ordinance. One participated by the shedding of blood.

The blood sacrifice was an ordinance of the day of Passover under the old covenant. Passover is a day:

Lev 23:4 These [are] the feasts of the LORD, [even] holy convocations, which ye shall proclaim in their seasons.
Lev 23:5 In the fourteenth [day] of the first month at even [is] the LORD'S passover.

The day set apart by God is still there. The method of observing it is changed under the new covenant since animal sacrifices are no longer needed. The day still occurs every year, on the 14th day of the first month of the Jewish year. It is the LORD'S passover. Jesus Chirst is the Lord. It is His passover.

The fact remains that there is no biblical evidence of a new testament "passover" where the physically uncircumcised were permitted to participate. Paul and the others referred to the Christian ordinance as the Lord's Supper, not passover. That you cannot disprove.

I've showed you where Paul commanded Christians to celebrate it...to "keep the feast" of Passover. I've shown you where Paul and the early council said that physical circumcision was not a requirement of the new covenant. Since the church at Corinth was composed of both gentiles (uncircumcised) and Jews (circumcised)then it's pretty clear that his instructing them to keep the feast included all the Christians there.

I'm not sure why you're drawing a distinction between the Lord's Supper and Passover. The Lord's Supper to Paul meant the bread and wine that Christ commanded they eat to remember him. This was done of Passover. The new covenant Passover meal is the bread and wine, the blood and body of Christ. Christ is the passover.

Lev 23:5 In the fourteenth [day] of the first month at even [is] the LORD'S passover.

Yes, and the animals that were killed were called "the Lord's sacrifice". So what? Does that mean there were perpetual? Do you still kill animals? What about "the Lord's heave offering" or "the Lord's priests" or "Lord's tabernacle"? There are lots of things in the old covenant identified as being "the Lord's" that have been done away with.

The day set apart by God is still there. The method of observing it is changed under the new covenant since animal sacrifices are no longer needed. The day still occurs every year, on the 14th day of the first month of the Jewish year. It is the LORD'S passover. Jesus Chirst is the Lord. It is His passover.

Sorry, you're still missing something here by continuing to live in the shadows of the older covenant.

"For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us." (1 Cor. 5:7)

Christ didn't just modify the keeping of passover. He fulfilled it. Just as He fulfilled all the blood sacrifices and feasts of the older covenant. There is no true passover without the external sprinkling of blood (Heb. 11:28). There is no more passover because there is no longer a need for a shadowy, bloody type to point to our Tue Passover, Jesus Christ.

Christ didn't just modify the keeping of passover. He fulfilled it. Just as He fulfilled all the blood sacrifices and feasts of the older covenant.

I've already showed you that the feasts were separate and outside of any covenant because they were given before the old covenant was ratified at Sinai....and end time prophecies say that they will be observed by all nations when Christ returns. How would you address that issue?

I've already showed you that the feasts were separate and outside of any covenant because they were given before the old covenant was ratified at Sinai....

No, you haven't. Such a distinction is arbitrary, since the covenant of Sinai was all given through Moses, the lawgiver (John 1:17). It's arbitrary to separate Exodus 12 from Exodus 20.

and end time prophecies say that they will be observed by all nations when Christ returns. How would you address that issue?

Since I'm not a dispensationalist I do not find anything in the old testament about "Christ's return" and a turning to bloody, old covernant feasts.

All the feasts pointed to Christ's coming into the world to save sinners by His blood atonement. The feasts have been fulfilled because Christ has come and "fulfilled all righteousness." Anyone looking to a future keeping of old covenant sacrifices is simply denying the sufficiency of Christ's work on the cross.

No, you haven't. Such a distinction is arbitrary, since the covenant of Sinai was all given through Moses, the lawgiver (John 1:17). It's arbitrary to separate Exodus 12 from Exodus 20.

Well you're mistaken on a major issue. Notably on your statement that all of the coveant of Sinai was given through Moses. The ten commandments were spokenn directly by God to the people....completely unmediated by Moses (Exodus 19:1, Duet 10:4)

Do you believe that everything that occurs in the collection of books we call "the old testament" is part of the old covenant that God made with Israel at Sinai? If not, then where do you draw the line?

Since I'm not a dispensationalist I do not find anything in the old testament about "Christ's return" and a turning to bloody, old covernant feasts.

You don't believe Christ is going to return to earth?

Zec 14:3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
Zec 14:4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which [is] before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, [and there shall be] a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

You don't think that this describes the return of Christ?

Zec 14:16 And it shall come to pass, [that] every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.
Zec 14:17 And it shall be, [that] whoso will not come up of [all] the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.
Zec 14:18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that [have] no [rain]; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.

You don't believe that what is described above is a future event? If not, how do you explain it?