Can We Skip Christmas? (2023)

       Romans 14:4-5 — "Who are you to judge someone else's servant?  To his own master, he stands or falls.  And he will stand, for Yahweh will make him stand."  

       Let me preface this blog with a few comments.  I have been called an idealist and a cynic as it relates to my views on Christmas.  I readily admit that I am an idealist and a misfit in the Kingdom of God, cynical about many things. The views below are my personal views; they are not meant to put anyone down for their personal practice of any human tradition.  After all, there is precedence for having a joyous feast and exchanging presents - for a SPECIFIC reason (Esther 9:18-28).  Some will also call me a hypocrite for not obeying Romans 14:22 (which states to keep my views to myself).  Don't we all tacitly disobey this verse when we turn on the outside Christmas lights?  (Romans 14 is a rather complicated chapter, when applied to largely-followed cultural traditions; it is much simpler when taking it at its face value.) Nonetheless, I believe that there is wisdom and freedom in my views; if you can glean a nugget of truth from them, then, "more power to ya".  If not, then you will at least have read an explanation of a "complicated mind", (another endearing epithet given to me).  The goal in everything we do, however, should be to "follow Christ", as Paul mentioned in 1 Corinthians 11:1.  

       It seems that each year, I feel more stress when December arrives. It is hard for me to find anything positive with this time of year. Christmas is looming, with all of its personal history and hundreds of years of Western cultural history. It's the time of year in which it is starting to get colder, which only slightly contributes to the stress. The hours of daylight are coming to their nadir, which does contribute greatly to my mood. I love spending time outside in general, so the double combination of dark and cold is disheartening. It is also the time of the year when I try to get the most wood cut and/or split for myself and for others, before snow ends that endeavor for the season.

        Christmas (the Christ Mass) was started by the Roman Catholic church in 336 A.D., as an "alternative" to the pagan celebrations, which were held around the winter solstice. The very fact that the "church" felt the need to resort to a cultural "alternative" can mean two things. It could have been a legitimate attempt to pull pagans into a sincere form of worship to Jesus. Or it could have been a desperate attempt to change the culture (apart from changing the individual heart), in the hopes that people would eventually give up their pagan practices. The latter sounds like what happened to America, with its form of cultural Christianity lasting until the end of the 20^th century; following Jesus was relegated to cultural morality, without the incentive to personally follow him. Having said that, it is basically irrelevant whether one has any cultural traditions related to Christmas. Paul gave us general instructions about how we think about observing special days. Romans 14:5-8 allows us all equal standing in treating certain days as we like. Colossians 2:16-17 also complements that sentiment in regard to special religious days. Not even the Jewish festivals are sacred any longer. Therefore, if one wants to consider the whole month of December as special or just Dec. 25, that is fine. If one doesn't care at all about those days, that is also fine.

       My Foundational Mindset —  The early church did not consider the birth day of Jesus to be special; what is of immensely greater import to the early church was the day that Jesus rose from the dead. That day became of higher importance, not because the body of Christ needed a yearly day of observance, but because it was the very foundation of the Christian faith. In my opinion, the yearly observance of Easter also diminishes the import of the resurrection of Jesus. If you need a holiday to remind you of the foundation of our faith, you are probably not living that faith in a daily fashion.

        There are many beautiful things associated with Christmas traditions. Houses in the western world are often decorated with special items and colorful lights. There are many great hymns and songs that are, unfortunately, only sung during the month of December. How sad for us in general! We could use them year-round. People generally bake and imbibe too many confections, along with the rich egg nog. This is probably a negative thing overall, even though the enjoyment of such is wonderful at the moment.

        Santa Claus and the surrounding myth is given precedence during this time. The idea of Santa Claus is rather stupid however, especially in reference to witholding gifts to "bad" kids. Why should we "deserve" any gifts whatsoever? How did we even get to a cultural tradition of spending money on gifts for friends and family for no apparent reason whatsoever, except that it happens to be the Christmas season? There is nothing wrong with giving gifts to people in general, but our culture wastes money because we feel that we "have" to give gifts. That is one cultural constraint that I have completely rejected. The culture-at-large also tells us that December is the season for giving, especially giving to the underprivileged. Once again, why should the month of December be special for giving? If you are not giving to the poor, as Jesus commanded, during the whole year; or if you are not regularly giving to advance the kingdom of God, then your giving in December will not make up for your lazy selfishness the rest of the year.

        Some people, even Christians, turn the "celebration" of Christmas into a form of worship to the Christmas culture itself. Jesus, and his birth, are relegated to the display of relics, but rarely talked about. Some of these folks, some subtly, and some not-so-subtly, make me feel that I need to join them in their celebration of the "Christmas idol". This simply adds to my stress and anger at not being left alone. Furthermore, certain family members make me feel like a little child, when they feel the need to watch me open their gifts – presents which I don't need, half of which I will give away, half of which have strings attached, all of which they cannot afford in their limited annual budget.  (Could you feel my frustrated hyperbolic perception in that last sentence? :>)

        A certain Christian even told me one time (2022), that a Christmas tree displayed in a hospital waiting room, was symbolic of the birth of Jesus. It meant that there was still some cultural affinity to God, and that the holiday was not relegated yet to just being a pagan winter festival. I would argue that it already is a pagan winter festival in the western world, because relatively few people care about Jesus anyway.

        Today, no one says "Merry Christmas!" anymore. It's simply "Happy Holidays!" Whenever I hear that phrase, I want to shout, "For what holidays are you wishing me happiness? Hanukkah? Jewish people make up a tiny minority of people. Kwanzaa? I'm not black. Some nebulous, inexplicable celebration?  New Year's Day? All of the above?  None of the above?  I find it absurd, that one can't decide, but instead throws out some generic term that could be used for any annual holiday that one is expected to observe.

        I don't mind when my wife decorates the house for Christmas (although it is over-the-top). I let her treat this holiday as she wishes. After all, it is an individual choice to make the day (or month) special or not. I get endearingly called "The Grinch" or "Ebenezer" or a curmudgeon, but I don't mind; I know that I don't want to steal someone else's gifts; and I know that I am not stingy toward the poor. I will also pull out Michael Sweet's rendition of "O Holy Night" in July and thoroughly enjoy it.

       I used to work on Christmas day when I was a front desk associate at a hotel. It made my day with family that much shorter, which was fine with me, since they pushed their sacredness of the day upon me. All I really wanted was peace of mind and to be left alone. One year I went to the beach by myself and did not talk with a single soul on Christmas Day. The nice weather made that day a                          perfectly-normal perfect day!

      On a different note, I support a full-time American Christian worker in Thailand, who uses the traditional trappings of Christmas to introduce people to Jesus. (Thailand is a predominantly Buddhist nation, but very much follows Western Christmas traditions, especially in the cities, where there is commercial activity.  I think it is the lights and decorations that are alluring.) Thais in general have no clue why the western world includes Jesus in the traditions. This gives my friend an opportunity to tell of the greater story of Jesus coming into our world to save us. The Thais have no pre-conceived idea of Christmas, based upon hundreds of years of faulty thinking and a myriad of traditions, (except what the commercial world portrays). Even God can use the well-intentioned, but stupid, plans of man, including all the history related thereto, to draw people closer to Him, and to open their eyes to truth.     

  Sometimes I think that ignorance is bliss, and that blindness is a blessing. However, one cannot unlearn what has been learned, or undo what one has experienced. We can only change our minds about how to live with unpleasant surroundings, trusting in God to provide joy in the midst of depression. For all you misfits out there, you are not alone in your own measure of disdain for contemporary Christmas.  Have yourself a normal month of December, as you strive to live and surrender daily to our Master, Jesus Christ!  And remember to be patient with all.  There is no need to argue about any of the ideas mentioned above.  Live at peace with one another, if it is in your power to do so (Romans 14:19). And may your good attitude be evident to all, even as you ignore the season. 

Thoughts on Luke 10:25ff – The Story of the Good Samaritan

        This blog is just some quick thoughts on several topics, and is not meant to be a totally coherent view on the same. 

       The first verse of this passage piqued my interest today because it used an odd phrase, which, by the way, Jesus did not concern himself with. Notwithstanding the fact that the expert in the law is testing Jesus, he uses the word "inherit" beside a phrase that connotes "doing something" in order to gain something else. "What must I do to inherit eternal life?" I looked up the word "inherit" in the Greek, which is"kleronomeso". It basically means to acquire or possess something by casting lots. This is similar to the Hebrew word "yaw-rash" found in Genesis 21:10, which means "to take possession of", and is used in the context of Ishmael not getting Abraham's inheritance that Isaac will get. This Hebrew word can mean "to take posession by force", but in the context, it is used in the normal way that we think about inheritance. It is something that we get by chance or plan, but only at someone else's will. It is never something that we earn, like wages or justice deserved. Despite the fact that much work is done by people to subtly and subconciously influence a decedent before their death to plan on bequeathing something of value to them, it is still the decedent who decides what to leave to the heir. It does not have to be based upon anything done by the inheritor. It can simply be based upon the fact that the next of kin will get what the previous person has accumulated. It can be based upon tradition also, such as the firstborn son getting a larger portion of the decedent's estate. It can entail a culturally set percentage of goods to all persons born to a parent. This would seem like the basis for the story of the Prodigal Son in Luke 15. The few verses of Luke 12:13-14 mention a scenario in which a brother gets all of the inheritance, part of which the other brother thinks he deserves. No explanation is given here; instead a warning of greed is given by Jesus.

      In all of these aforementioned passages, the idea of inheritance is not based upon receiving, as if one is owed wages. Oh, there are hints in the text, that might make the recipients think this way, and they probably do. However, a true inheritance is not worked for, but simply received from the person bequeathing. This idea is important when reading verses like Ephesians 1:14, which links inheritance with believing, not with working. Of course, on the surface, the words of Jesus in Matthew 25:34ff give the idea that obtaining the inheritance is based upon works, specifically visiting prisoners, clothing the naked, and feeding the hungry. Then again, one could argue correctly, that putting our saving faith in Jesus (believing) is the foundation for those good works to be produced by the Holy Spirit as he changes our behavior. Or the idea of works in 25:34f could be a follow-up to the previous parable in verses 14-30, which does emphasize "doing" something with the talents. Colossians 3:24 may be the outlier in providing an exception to the rule of "inheritance; in context, it mentions our inheritance as a reward for "working for the Lord" (verse 23). Perhaps there is a general inheritance for all believers – eternal life; and extra inheritance based upon the works that we have done, which we also know is true, as there are many scriptures that speak of recompense, just not using the word "inheritance".

       Back to the lawyer in Luke 10 – maybe it wasn't a stretch then for him to use the word "inherit" as he was thinking of what must be "done". Jesus does provide an answer that consists of "doing". Love God wholeheartedly and love neighbor as yourself will bring life, as he affirms the lawyer's own answer. Here is where the problem enters. The lawyer seems to want to quantify how much of this loving someone else is required. The commandments themselves are vague in the percentage category, unless one considers loving God with all of our being as 100%. Loving our neighbors as our selves would also count within that 100%, since loving someone like we love our own selves would be obeying God, so that counts as loving God. Nonetheless, the lawyer was sneaky; that is why he was a lawyer – obeying the letter, but not necessarily the spirit. The percentage thereof, he was trying to elicit from Jesus. Once again, Jesus hit him right where he needed it the most. Taking time to care for some loathsome half-breed pagan is not what the lawyer wanted to hear, which is why Jesus told it to him.

       How often has God put "undesirables" in our lives in order for us to accommodate them, which is really loving God. Picking up drunks on the side of the road, or giving hitchhikers a lift, or giving local drunks a ride home, or giving something tangible to a panhandler, or even "rescuing" naked women on Rt 9, are just some examples of what Len and I have experienced. I am sure that we all have supported foreign and native ministries that do exactly what Jesus called for in Matthew 25.

       Back to the Prodigal Son story. I have some more thoughts on the side of the story that was left unsaid. Of course, the point of the story that Jesus was making was the great love of the father for his wayward son – redemption from a sinful life. What about the inheritance though? The son received his portion of what would have been the current physical inheritance, if the father had died at that point. From the gist of the story, it sounds like it was just cash. So now, what does the son get after the father dies, since the son squandered everything previously given. Well, he does not get the portion of his brother. Even though his brother is miffed by the father welcoming his brother back, his father still has a right to treat him as he wishes. The older brother's portion is technically not his yet. However, the father would not be unfair in any future dealings. Whatever the estate was worth when the younger brother left, would definitely be the older brother's when the father died. What if the estate grows even further before the father dies? He is free to still give any portion of that to the younger brother. The father's point in reacting to the older brother is to point out that the father is ready to lavish his love upon the whole family if they would only ask. Why do I think the younger son will get next to nothing when the father dies? Proverbs 20:21 fits perfectly into this story – "An inheritance quickly gained will NOT be blessed in the end." Nonetheless, the younger brother probably doesn't even care at this point; he is just glad that Dad took him back in, where there is plenty to eat. He probably already knows that there will be nothing left when Dad dies, but it doesn't matter. He has come to his senses and knows that he is loved and taken care of, as long as the father is alive. Once the older brother has most of the estate, what will happen then?

       I often think of these types of earthly scenarios that actually happen around the world, as we all progress in our years of attempting to please God. I think of Paul, who was told in Acts 9:16 "I will show him how much he must suffer for my name". I wonder if that suffering was a worldly recompense for all the persecution that he perpetrated. Then, I wonder how much of that suffering was counted as participating in the sufferings of Christ (Philippians 3:10).

       So, be careful of what you wish from your earthly inheritance, and strive for the rewards that may be linked to a fantastic eternal inheritance that we don't deserve anyway.