The Truth About Christmas

Originally posted by truejew
When you falsely accuse others while you have a beam in your eye, you are just like the Pharisees.

Whom have I falsely accused? I've accused Reckart of running a diploma mill, and all evidence is that he has. I've accused him of offering his phony diplomas to coddle the egos of his followers in contradiction to Christ's teachings, and his own words ("This deserves honor!") are a testimony to it. And I've accused you to being blind to these truths because of your own indoctrination into his cult, and your constant lying and denials are sufficient evidence of that.

So it would seem that the "false accusations" are actually yours, given that I'm not "mean", I don't hate anyone, and I'm not a Pharisee. And, truth be told, I don't care whether you stay in your cult or not -- it's my responsibility to inform you of the truth, but your own salvation is your own business. It would be nice if you woke up, but you seem content to follow your Pied Piper to your doom, so that's on you.

reply to post by adjensen


You are a Pharisee. Your pope and his follows try hard to look holy on the outside, but inside there is nothing holy. Murders, wars, and priests having fun with children is not holy. While your church is full of sin, you accuse someone else, without proof. You need to remove the beam from your eye first. Otherwise you open yourself up for judgement.

Originally posted by truejew
reply to post by adjensen

 

You are a Pharisee. Your pope and his follows try hard to look holy on the outside, but inside there is nothing holy. Murders, wars, and priests having fun with children is not holy. While your church is full of sin, you accuse someone else, without proof. You need to remove the beam from your eye first. Otherwise you open yourself up for judgement.

As I said earlier, when you see me defending "murders, wars and priests having fun with children", you might actually have a point. Unfortunately for you, you're the one defending immoral actions, not me.

If you believe that we are held accountable for our own actions, it's time for some introspection as to why you'd lie about me in order to defend the immoral activities of your leader. Hopefully that will lead to you waking up.

reply to post by adjensen


Your leaders are Pharisees and by teaching their doctrines and following their ways you are too.

reply to post by truejew


As I said earlier, when you see me defending "murders, wars and priests having fun with children", you might actually have a point. Unfortunately for you, you're the one defending immoral actions, not me.

No one is impressed with your "you are a pharisee" silliness. When I look at your posts here on ATS, there seems to be a common undercurrent of dishonesty to them. Lies, even when they have the best intentions, are still lies. Given that people will associate your dishonesty with your "real church", you're probably doing more harm than good with your defense of your cult leader's immoral actions.

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by truejew

 

As I said earlier, when you see me defending "murders, wars and priests having fun with children", you might actually have a point.

By being catholic, you support your leaders.

Originally posted by adjensen

Unfortunately for you, you're the one defending immoral actions, not me.

Unlike you, I do not judge without proof. You have provided no proof.

Originally posted by adjensen

When I look at your posts here on ATS, there seems to be a common undercurrent of dishonesty to them.

Do you have proof of dishonesty in my posts?

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by truejew

 

As I said earlier, when you see me defending "murders, wars and priests having fun with children", you might actually have a point.

By being catholic, you support your leaders.

So as an American, you support everyone in Washington DC, all the decisions that they make and actions that they take? Well, that makes you even more immoral.

Unlike you, I do not judge without proof. You have provided no proof.

I have provided a plethora of proof about Reckart's diploma mill, his rejection of Christ's teachings, and his money grubbing ways. You've responded with lies, excuses and ignorance. Case closed.

*** ATTENTION ***

STOP THE BICKERING NOW.

GET ON TOPIC.

Originally posted by elevatedone
*** ATTENTION ***

STOP THE BICKERING NOW.

GET ON TOPIC.

Well, to summarize my earlier points:

• "Christmas" is not Jesus' birthday and no Christian above the age of ten thinks it is
  
• It is no secret that the Catholic church instituted the festival in order to discourage Christians from attending pagan feasts
  
• There is no prohibition in the Bible against Christmas trees, caroling, gift giving, etc.
  
• Even if Christmas has traditions that have pagan origins, no one celebrates them for pagan reasons, so who cares?

Thanks for the reminder that there once was a topic here.

Originally posted by adjensen

Well, to summarize my earlier points:

"Christmas" is not Jesus' birthday and no Christian above the age of ten thinks it is

Correct. It would have been sometime in September. The Church was never told to and never celebrated the birth of Jesus. They were told by Jesus to take communion at Passover in remembrance of Him.

Originally posted by adjensen

It is no secret that the Catholic church instituted the festival in order to discourage Christians from attending pagan feasts

Such tactics should not be used by the Church. Teach against the pagan feasts, don't merge them into the Church.

Originally posted by adjensen

There is no prohibition in the Bible against Christmas trees, caroling, gift giving, etc.

Actually the Christmas tree is spoken against in Jeremieh and we are told to not learn the ways of the heathen.

Originally posted by adjensen

Even if Christmas has traditions that have pagan origins, no one celebrates them for pagan reasons, so who cares?

God cares. Don't you know, a little leaven makes the whole lump leavened?

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen

It is no secret that the Catholic church instituted the festival in order to discourage Christians from attending pagan feasts

Such tactics should not be used by the Church. Teach against the pagan feasts, don't merge them into the Church.

Given that it happened 1700 years ago, it's a little late for the Monday morning quarterbacking. The point is that there is no secret of the fact.

Maybe a simple "don't do that" is effective for some small number of people, but for the majority, it's easier to give something up (the pagan festivals) if you give them something else to do instead.

Actually the Christmas tree is spoken against in Jeremieh and we are told to not learn the ways of the heathen.

As discussed earlier, unless Jeremiah had a time machine, he wasn't writing about "Christmas trees". The passage in question is about idolatry, not Christmas trees, so unless you're praying to your tree, consider it divine and the source of your salvation, it has nothing to do with Christmas.

God cares. Don't you know, a little leaven makes the whole lump leavened?

God cares if you celebrate Christmas because you're a pagan and you worship your tree. Otherwise, why would he care? Honouring Christ by holding a festival to celebrate his coming into the world is not a bad thing.

Originally posted by adjensen

Given that it happened 1700 years ago, it's a little late for the Monday morning quarterbacking. The point is that there is no secret of the fact.

My point was the Church would not have used deception like that. Deception is not a fruit of the Spirit.

Originally posted by adjensen

Maybe a simple "don't do that" is effective for some small number of people, but for the majority, it's easier to give something up (the pagan festivals) if you give them something else to do instead.

It is effective for those who truly love God more than traditions. The others are lost any way.

Originally posted by adjensen

As discussed earlier, unless Jeremiah had a time machine, he wasn't writing about "Christmas trees". The passage in question is about idolatry, not Christmas trees, so unless you're praying to your tree, consider it divine and the source of your salvation, it has nothing to do with Christmas.

Any one can see that the Christmas tree is the same as being described by Jeremieh. If a person has an idol in their house and does not pray to it, they still have it in their house.

Originally posted by adjensen

God cares if you celebrate Christmas because you're a pagan and you worship your tree. Otherwise, why would he care? Honouring Christ by holding a festival to celebrate his coming into the world is not a bad thing.

Celebrating the coming of Christ by using pagan idols and customs is not honoring Christ.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen

Given that it happened 1700 years ago, it's a little late for the Monday morning quarterbacking. The point is that there is no secret of the fact.

My point was the Church would not have used deception like that. Deception is not a fruit of the Spirit.

It wasn't a deception, where on Earth do you keep coming up with it being a "deception"? Here, let me put it in bold for you:

NO ONE KNEW WHEN CHRIST WAS BORN, SO THEY SIMPLY SCHEDULED THE FESTIVAL TO CELEBRATE HIS BIRTH AT A CONVENIENT TIME, WHEN PEOPLE WERE ALREADY CELEBRATING A FESTIVAL THAT THE CHURCH WANTED TO DISCOURAGE AND MADE NO SECRET OF THE FACT.

What's so hard to grasp about that?

Any one can see that the Christmas tree is the same as being described by Jeremieh. If a person has an idol in their house and does not pray to it, they still have it in their house.

How is anything, which is not worshiped, which was never worshiped (in itself,) and which will never be worshiped, an idol? Simply because it's an object? Are we supposed to clear everything out of our houses, just in case someone worshiped a chair, loaf of bread or piece of clothing in the past? Should we kill all cattle because of the "Golden Calf" incident?

Stop being so mired in works, the law and nitpicking.

And, for the love of pete, learn how to spell the prophet's name if you think he's vital to your salvation.

Originally posted by adjensen

How is anything, which is not worshiped, which was never worshiped (in itself,) and which will never be worshiped, an idol? Simply because it's an object?

Jeremieh wrote against it.

Originally posted by adjensen

Stop being so mired in works, the law and nitpicking.

This is not about works and the law, it is about faith and holiness.

Originally posted by adjensen

And, for the love of pete, learn how to spell the prophet's name if you think he's vital to your salvation.

Would Jeremieh have the name of the moon god in his name?

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen

How is anything, which is not worshiped, which was never worshiped (in itself,) and which will never be worshiped, an idol? Simply because it's an object?

Jeremieh wrote against it.

No, he didn't, he wrote against idolatry. Christmas trees obviously didn't exist in Jeremiah's time, so he's obviously not talking about a decorated tree that no one worships. Or do you think it's okay to worship... oh... computers, since Jeremiah never said anything against them? Same logic, ace.

Originally posted by adjensen

And, for the love of pete, learn how to spell the prophet's name if you think he's vital to your salvation.

Would Jeremieh have the name of the moon god in his name?

Why wouldn't he? Do you think letters can hurt you?

His name is Jeremiah, not Jeremieh. Claiming otherwise is more of the nitpicking dishonesty that you're known for.

Originally posted by adjensen

Christmas trees obviously didn't exist in Jeremiah's time, so he's obviously not talking about a decorated tree that no one worships.

Jeremieh wrote about them, so they did exist. Changing the name does not remove the sin.

Originally posted by adjensen

Claiming otherwise is more of the nitpicking dishonesty that you're known for.

Let's stay on topic and avoid the slander.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen

Christmas trees obviously didn't exist in Jeremiah's time, so he's obviously not talking about a decorated tree that no one worships.

Jeremieh wrote about them, so they did exist. Changing the name does not remove the sin.

"Jeremieh" never wrote about anything, since you made up the name.

However, Jeremiah wrote about idolatry.

Turning to translations other than the King James also helps our understanding. Where the King James reads "one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe" (verse 3), the New International Version says "they cut a tree out of the forest, and a craftsman shapes it with his chisel." The tool referred to in the passage is not a woodsman's tool, but that of a wood carver. Most modern English translations agree with the NIV.

Jeremiah is not condemning Christmas trees. He is condemning idolatry. The trees in Jeremiah 10 are cut down to carve them into worthless idols that will later be decorated with gold and silver. Jeremiah says nothing about Christmas trees. That custom originated in northern Europe, not in ancient Judea. (Source)

(Read the full page for an explanation as to why the passage needs to be read in context to understand why it's about idolatry.)

Also:

Christians should know that they can use a Christmas tree with a good conscience. It is unfortunate and wrong when well-meaning Christians call something sin that is not sin, and enslave the consciences of their fellow believers with imaginary sin! Shame on such Christians! (Source)

One can find thousands of sources that support my position and only crackpots that support yours. Not only is your creative interpretation of Jeremiah wrong, your insistence that anyone who disagrees with you is a sinner is also wrong.

reply to post by adjensen


Quoting sinners who are attempting to justify their sins does not save them or you from sin. It is clear that Jeremieh taught against the Christmas tree.

Originally posted by truejew
reply to post by adjensen

 

Quoting sinners who are attempting to justify their sins does not save them or you from sin. It is clear that Jeremieh taught against the Christmas tree.

So your operating theory is the Jeremiah had a time machine, eh? Why didn't he preach against Santa Claus? Singing Christmas carols? Frosty the Snowman? Mistletoe?

And claiming that everyone who disagrees with your kooky ideas is a sinner is probably a sin.

The first decorated tree was at Riga in Latvia, in 1510. In the early 16th century, Martin Luther is said to have decorated a small Christmas Tree with candles, to show his children how the stars twinkled through the dark night.

Christmas trees didn't exist until the year 1510, doofus. Idols made out of wood, not Christmas trees, existed in the time of Jeremiah.

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by adjensen

 

So your operating theory is the Jeremiah had a time machine, eh?

I said nothing of a time machine. Christmas trees existed in Jeremieh's day. They where not called Christmas trees in his days, but they are the same.

I will once again forgive your name calling.