1. Their coffee’s not that
great, so there’s plenty of other places to get caffeinated,
2. It’s not the responsibility
of a coffee-chain to promote Christmas, and
3. It turned out to be quite
unfounded anyway. There was no ban on Christmas (Green), just a change in cup
design.
And of course with any
controversy like this one, the humorous memes came out. One that stood out in
particular was this one…
The pagan symbol in the
Starbucks logo is a 16th Century Norse siren whose origins go back
to a snake-legged goddess from Greece in the 4th century BC. And of
course, to not drink coffee at Starbucks because of a logo might be a bit
extreme. But, that’s not my point. My point is that while looking at this image
it dawned on me that this actually reflected the nature of Christmas.
It is very widely accepted
that many elements of Christmas have come from pagan practices and traditions
from around the time of the winter solstice. And occasionally, when we approach Christmas, we might encounter some
kind of debate as to whether it is right or not for Christians to celebrate
Christmas because of its apparent pagan heritage. Those who are on the side of
the objectors, such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses and what can be best described
as ‘High-Puritan’ Christians, will be labelled as unreasonable, legalistic
kill-joys, a Scrooge or Grinch accompanied with a ‘bah-humbug.’ And we might
agree that in some ways they are. But, if we are to be Berean Baptists, wanting
to live obedient to scripture rather than popular tradition and opinion, then
we need to be willing to ignore that stigma. Not only does the enemy like to
hide the truth by deception, he also likes to hide the truth by associating it
with heresy. Take prosperity for example. God wants to bless us materially, but
because of the abuses of the prosperity Gospel, some people have a knee-jerk
reaction and take hold of a poverty Gospel, and the enemy has successfully kept
them disempowered. And so, by letting go of the fear of being labelled as ‘one
of those people’, we can come to the
Scriptures and examine history with fresh and less-biased eyes. And this is
true for either side of the debate. We need to be willing to come back to our
conclusions and convictions and test them.
So, just as people were
asking, ‘should Starbucks celebrate Christmas?’, let us ask ourselves ‘should
Christians celebrate Christmas?’ I should clarify what I am not asking here.
I’m not asking if Christmas is ‘bad’. Spending time having fun with the family,
expressing generosity through giving, celebrating the birth of Jesus, telling
the world the message of Jesus. These are all good and wonderful things. But
the question is, is it biblical? To
be honest, I don’t have a definite answer. I’m still unsure because working
this out. There are good points on either side, but I haven’t heard enough to
help me make a conclusion. So, I thought I would share some of the things I’ve
come across and hopefully it will inspire you to consider the question further.
I want to begin by talking
about the date of Christmas. It appears that no one began trying to calculate
Jesus’ birth until late second/early third century. Origin of Alexandria, who
lived between 165-264 rejected the Roman practice of honouring births as Pagan.
Clement of Alexandria (150-215) reports that a number of dates had been
proposed by Christians in Egypt, but December 25th was not one of
them. He writes:
There are
those who have determined not only the year of our Lord’s birth, but also the
day; and they say that it took place in the 28th year of Augustus, and in the
25th day of [the Egyptian month] Pachon [May 20 in our calendar] … And treating
of His Passion, with very great accuracy, some say that it took place in the
16th year of Tiberius, on the 25th of Phamenoth [March 21]; and others on the
25th of Pharmuthi [April 21] and others say that on the 19th of Pharmuthi
[April 15] the Savior suffered. Further, others say that He was born on the
24th or 25th of Pharmuthi [April 20 or 21]. (Stromateis 1.21.145)
Thus, the earliest
calculations placed His birth in the Spring. But it would seem that this is
based on philosophically connecting Jesus’ birth to his crucifixion, rather
than the bible or history. For example, “A Latin treatise written around 243
pegged March 21, because that was believed to be the date on which God created
the sun” (Coffman). But still at this point, there was no celebration of the
birth of Jesus.
The earliest reference that we
have for the birth of Jesus in December is “a mid-fourth-century Roman almanac
that lists the death dates of various Christian bishops and martyrs. The first
date listed, December 25, is marked: natus
Christus in Betleem Judeae: ‘Christ was born in Bethlehem of Judea’”
(McGowan). There was also at this time the observance of Epiphany on January 6,
primarily by those in the east, as mentioned by Augustine of Hippo around
400AD.
The most popular theory for
why this date was chosen was because the church had commandeered pagan
festivals to make it easier for people to transition from their pagan past into
Christianity. The two main attributed feasts are the Roman Saturnalia, and the Natalis Solis Invicti, or ‘Birth of the
Unconquerable Sun,’ which was the birthday of the Roman Sun god, and celebrated
on the 25th of December. Also, related to Sol was the Mithras cult
which goes back to the first century and attributed his birthday to the 25th
of December.
The problem with this theory
is that although the parallels in symbology do suggest some kind of
relationship, there is no historical evidence directly linking Christmas with
the Roman Saturnalia, or Sol Invictus. There is not one contemporary in the mid
third century who wrote about ‘taking over the pagan days.’ The earliest
connection we have is from a marginal note made by a Syrian Bishop, Jacob
Bar-Salibi, in the twelfth century. Thus, Christmas as a redeemed day is
difficult to prove. Moreover, as discussed above, the contemporary evidence we
do have for the December 25th and January 6th dates
reveal that both groups used the same formula, but they ended up with different
results because they used different calendars: “we have Christians in two parts
of the world calculating Jesus’ birth on the basis that his death and
conception took place on the same day (March 25 or April 6) and coming up with
two close but different results (December 25 and January 6)” (McGowan).
However, that these explanations
are philosophical rather than historical suggests that they may actually be
justifications and defences for observing a contextualised festival. Also, Tertullian
does mention (and rebukes) Christians observing Saturnalia (Tert. On Idolatry. 14) which means the church
at that time was no stranger to participating in pagan customs. It also
suggests that they just enjoyed Saturnalia so much they Christianised it,
rather than the popular theory that it was an evangelical strategy. Moreover,
the shared dates and iconography of Christmas does indicate some relationship.
The evolution of Christmas to today is a
long and complex one. In fact, much of its present form didn’t emerge until the
eighteenth and nineteenth century. Nonetheless, much of our current traditions
can be traced back to pagan origins. For example, the Christmas Tree finds its
origins in Germanic and Norse paganism where trees were considered the dwelling
place of their gods, with homes being decorated with evergreen branches during
the winter solstice, or Yule, and were considered a symbol of fertility. This
was carried on through to the Middle Ages when evergreen branches were hung on
either the door or inside the home to keep evil spirits away. The wreath finds
its roots in Ancient Greece when after offerings were made to Helios, an olive
or laurel wreath was hung on the door in the hope of protection for their
crops. Perhaps this was incorporated into the Roman Saturnalia as Saturn was
considered the god of the harvest and its celebration marked the end of the
harvest season. This practice was also found in the Scandinavian harvest wreath
and used
The bible does give actually
give some indication of when Jesus was born. We can begin with Zechariah’s time
of service in the Temple (Luke 1:8-13), because from that, using 1 Chronicles
24 we find that being from the division of Abijah he would have served his first
course around June. We read that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit in Mary
during Elizabeth’s sixth month. Provided Elizabeth conceived shortly after Zechariah’s
service, Jesus’ conception can be said to have occurred in December and with
His birth nine months later in September. However, if it was the second course,
then Zechariah would be serving around October, pushing Jesus’ birth to late
December. However, being the middle of winter, and during an important festival
and season of rest, it is unlikely Ceasar Augustus would have called an Empire
wide census (Lk 2:1). This method is not quite conclusive and fool-proof as it
assumes Elizabeth fell pregnant almost immediately after Zecharius’ course in
the Temple, but there is a sense in which it was soon after. And despite being
inconclusive, it is the closest we can come. Moreover, it is based on biblical
evidence more than philosophical assumption.
As mentioned above, Christmas
as an intentionally redeemed day is difficult to prove. But let’s assume for a
moment that Christmas is a redeemed day and that the philosophical argument for
December 25th was a justification. Is this possible for the Christian? Is it biblical
to ‘Christianise’ a pagan festival?
Critical contextualisation
teaches that when it comes to contextualising the Gospel and Christianity into
a new culture we are to reject the unbiblical, accept the biblical, and redeem
the neutral. That culture might pray to a false god, so that’s unbiblical. But
praying is biblical, so they can pray to God. Their culture may use a
particular genre of music and speak a particular language. These are neutral,
so they can use those to worship God with. And so when we come to Christmas, it
might seem like there’s nothing unbiblical about decorating a tree on a certain
day. There’s certainly no verse forbidding Christmas trees. And honouring God
for the things he has done in Salvation History, the very focus of the day’s
origin, is definitely biblical. So how should we approach a
redeemed-day-Christmas according to the critical contextualisation process?
There is a passage of
Scripture that we need to consider and begin to take seriously if we are to biblically
answer this and comes from Deuteronomy 12:29-31
When the
Lord your God cuts off before you the nations whom you go in to dispossess, and
you dispossess them and dwell in their land, take care that you be not ensnared
to follow them, after they have been destroyed before you, and that you do not
inquire about their gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods? - that
I also may do the same.’ You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way,
for every abominable thing that the Lord hates they have done for their gods…
Quite simply put, we cannot
take a pagan practice and redeem it for worshipping God. This is because when
we do, He doesn’t see us honouring Him; He sees us honouring that false god.
This was the sin of the Israelites worshiping the Golden Calf. Two things from
this story need to be noted. One is when the people said to Aaron “make us gods
who shall go before us” (Ex 32:1). The Hebrew for gods is Elohim, which is not only the plural form of El (god): gods; but also the name used for God in verses such as
Genesis 1:1. The second is the words of Aaron, ‘“Tomorrow shall be a feast to
the Lord (YHWH)” And they rose up early the next day and offered burnt offerings
and brought peace offerings’ (Ex 32:5-6). This, and other factors such as how
they only built one statue and the declaration that the statue was the god who
brought them out of Egypt, strongly suggest that the second meaning of Elohim was what was intended. Also,
consider that the statue was a calf, a symbol of strength. Coming out of Egypt
where gods were worshipped through mediums such as statues and people this
interpretation makes sense. They didn’t know what happened to Moses, their
mediator, and demanded Aaron give them a new one. The Israelites had attempted
to redeem elements of Egyptian religion for worshipping Yahweh, and what was
His response to Moses: “…let me alone, that my wrath may burn hot against them
and I may consume them, in order that I may make a great nation of you” (Ex
32:10). It’s not about what it means to us; it’s about what it means to Him. Even
if we’re sincere, if we worship God in an unacceptable manner, He will reject
our worship (Gen 4:5-7, Isa 1:11-17). So if Christmas was intentionally
established as a redeemed Saturnalia, Sol Invictus, or Yule, then we need to
reconsider whether or not Jesus would be happy with us honouring his birthday
on the birthday of a sun god according to their customs.
I am yet to hear an argument
from those who say Christmas is okay for Christians that deals with this biblical
principle properly. Normally comparisons such as ‘druids drinking hot chocolate’
are made, but this is irrelevant as hot chocolate is neutral, and it fails to
address the ‘package’ that is Christmas. They also appeal to how fun and nice
Christmas is, and as I mentioned in the introduction, this is very true. But
there’s also many fun and nice things in New Age Spirituality and Buddhism, so
we cannot use that as an argument because the Christian needs to be biblical,
not emotional.
But what if it is not a
contextualised holiday? What if any relationship to pagan worship is merely
coincidental? In that case, it would be extra-biblical rather than
non-biblical, and therefore posing no problem with Christians celebrating
Christmas. Any day is a good day to remember and give thanks for the
incarnation, and setting aside some time to intentionally remember Jesus coming
into the Earth is good. The Gospel Coalition explains that the ‘waiting’ of
Advent reminds us in the midst of this difficult world, that there is one
final Advent that is yet to
come. Just as the ancient Israelites waited for the coming of the Messiah in
flesh, we await the consummation of the good news through the Messiah’s return
in glory. In Advent, believers confess that the infant who drew his first
ragged breath between a virgin’s knees has yet to speak his final word.
However, God has already given
us holidays to remember and celebrate the things He has done for His people in
the Feast Days, none of which were ever repealed (see September Celebrations).
Why would our creator take away days of celebration? And why is it that we pour
out so much time, energy, and money honouring human traditions, but we are
unwilling to celebrate His days? Should we not put His ordinances before our
traditions? God has already given us a week-long festival to remember Immanuel
and to give thanks for all He has given us and will give us, and that is the
Feast of Tabernacles, or in Hebrew Sukkot.
During Sukkot, God’s people remember
their time in the wilderness as they awaited their entrance into the promised
land, and how God lived among them in His own tent during this time. And now
that Jesus has come, we now remember how “The Word became flesh and dwelt (tabernacled)
among us” (Jn 1:14), and how He now dwells within us as we await our
inheritance in the promised world to come where we will live near the tent of
God for eternity (Rev 21:3). Considering it is closer to Jesus’ birthday, that
it’s in the Bible, and how its symbology and iconography better reflect the
Gospel than Christmas, wouldn’t it make more sense to celebrate Jesus’ birthday
then and make Christmas more of a time of general thanksgiving? If we want to
go extra-biblical, that’s fine. But let’s not ignore the biblical in the
process.
If we are to be Berean
Baptists and not make null and void the word of God according to our traditions
(Mark 7:13), we need to evaluate Christmas scripturally, apart from social
perception, stigma, or attachment to tradition. And if we conclude for whatever
reason that Christmas is unbiblical, getting rid of it doesn’t have to be the
solution. It’s a great time of year, lots of fun and great memories. Maybe the
day just needs to be redeemed. Maybe we should keep the Saturn in Saturnalia
and take the Christ out of Christmas, especially since it’s most likely not
even His birthday. Maybe we need to remove the pagan iconography. But maybe it
is just a tree. Then again, maybe Yoga is just stretching and maybe Israel just
made up their own feast day. The matter of Christmas is a tricky question and a
big issue. Yet, if we are to walk with God in His ways, it’s one we need to
honestly work through.
Basu, Tanya. ‘Who is Krampus?
Explaining the Horrific Christmas Devil’. nationalgeographic.com,
19 December 2013.
Coffman, Elesha. ‘Why December
25?’ christianitytoday.com, 8 Aug
2008.
‘Goat-Headed Christmas Cheer:
Run, Kris Kringle, Krampus Is Coming!’. spiegel.de,
2 Dec 2008.
Green, Emma. 'The Inanity of the Starbucks
Christmas Cup ‘Controversy’' theatlantic.com. 10 Nov 2015.
Hastings, James. Encyclopedia of Religion and
Ethics, Part 16. Bloomsbury: New York, 2003.
McGowan, Andrew. ‘How December
25 Became Christmas’. Biblicalarcheology.org,
8 Dec 2014.
Pearse, Roger. ‘The Roman Cult
of Mithras’
Pasori, Sazan. ‘Daniel Kalman
Reveals the Origin of Starbucks’ Loge and its Trademark Siren’. au.complex.com, 1 Sept 2013.
Setzer, Ed. ‘What is Contextualization’
christianitytoday.com, 12 Oct 2014.
The Gospel Coalition, ‘Why
Celebrate Advent’. thegospelcoalition.org,
26 Nov 2013.
Image sourced from:
