Sometimes I think that if Elizabethโs story had happened back in the Old Testament, weโd spend much more time on it than we do and be much more amazed by it than we are. Instead, we kind of tend to regard her as a footnote in the Christmas story, overshadowed by the story of Jesusโ incarnation.
And Iโm sure Elizabeth is totally fine with that. Like her own son said, โHe must increase, but I must decrease.โ
But Elizabeth’s story is a rich gift to Christ’s birth narrative, adding wonder and awe to the divine beauty of the tale. It is also God’s gift to us as Christian women, giving us a sister in Christ to look up to and learn from.
In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah, of the division of Abijah. And he had a wife from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. And they were both righteous before God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and statutes of the Lord. But they had no child, because Elizabeth was barren, and both were advanced in years.
Luke 1:5-7
Elizabeth was righteous before God. She walked blamelessly in all the commandments and statutes of the Lord. Like you and me, she wasn’t perfect. She still fell into sin. But because she loved the Lord, she repented, and strove to live her life to please Him.
But Elizabeth also knew sorrow. She and Zechariah had no child. She had been barren for all of her childbearing years, and now she was elderly – some scholars estimate at least 60 years old – and long past menopause.
If you or someone you know has ever experienced the heartbreak of infertility, you know just how painful that is. And in biblical times, culture added insult to injury in a lot of ways. It was assumed any infertility was a problem with the woman, when today we know that men can also be infertile.
Because children are a blessing from the Lord and the fruit of the womb is a reward, and because God sometimes closed the wombs of certain women in Scripture as a result of sin – it was often assumed that if you werenโt having children you were cursed by God, or your barrenness was some sort of punishment for sin.
And in addition to all of that, in that day and time, women were โlow man on the totem poleโ so to speak. They were regarded as less than men in practically every way- intelligence, abilities, worth, and so on. They couldnโt testify in court because their testimony wasnโt considered credible. And, maybe youโve even heard of the daily prayer that Jewish men still say today, thanking God for not creating them a gentileโฆa slaveโฆor a woman.
So, practically the only way women of that time could achieve a modicum of respect and status in society was by marrying well and by having sons. And, though she did marry well, Elizabeth didnโt have any children.
Try to imagine being a woman of Elizabethโs time, having all of that on your shoulders, and having virtually no power to do anything about it.
Do you think you might be a little bitter toward God?
โLord, my husbandโs a priest! We canโt go around having people think youโve cursed us.โ
โWeโve been serving You all these years, and all weโve asked for is a baby. You owe us.โ
โYouโre not going to give me the one thing I want most in life? Forget it – there are plenty of other gods to worship. Iโll go serve one of them.โ
But not Elizabeth. Elizabeth just kept getting up day after day, trusting the Lord, serving the Lord, obeying the Lord.
And letโs not forget, we know the rest of the story. We know God is going to miraculously open Elizabeth’s womb and she’ll be the mother of John the Baptist. We know sheโs going to be one of the first people to learn the good news of the Messiah. We know sheโs going to be celebrated and famous across the world once her story gets into Scripture.
Elizabeth didnโt know that. For all those years faithfully following and trusting the Lord, she didnโt know any of that. For all she knew, she was going to die childless and in obscurity, quickly to be forgotten even by those who knew her. And yet she still chose to walk faithfully with the Lord.
Elizabeth was faithful to God because of who God is, not for what she could get out of Him. She served God to get more of God, not to get the goodies.
But look what happens next…
Now while [Zechariah] was serving as priest before God when his division was on duty, according to the custom of the priesthood, he was chosen by lot to enter the temple of the Lord and burn incense…And there appeared to him an angel of the Lord standing on the right side of the altar of incense…the angel said to him, โDo not be afraid, Zechariah, for your prayer has been heard, and your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall call his name John.
Luke 1:8-9,11,13
Zechariah has the great honor of entering the temple and burning incense. Suddenly – a miracle! Gabriel, who stands in the very presence of God Himself, has brought the amazing news that Elizabeth – barren and past her time – is going to give birth to the forerunner of the Messiah.
And Zechariah doesnโt believe it.
But Elizabeth does…
Thus the Lord has done for me in the days when he looked on me, to take away my reproach among people.
Luke 1:25
Elizabeth believed God.
In those days Mary arose and went with haste into the hill country, to a town in Judah, and she entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth. And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, and she exclaimed with a loud cry, โBlessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, when the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord.โ
Luke 1:39-45
The newly pregnant Mary comes for a visit. The Holy Spirit reveals to and through Elizabeth that the baby Mary is carrying is the Messiah. And, once again, in great humility, Elizabeth believes Him: “Who am I, that my Lord should come to me?” Elizabeth wondered.
Indeed – who are any of us, that our Lord should come to us?
Elizabeth did not seek out Jesus. He came to find her. So, we who were dead in our sins and trespasses did not seek Him. He came to us, to seek and to save that which was lost.
Now the time came for Elizabeth to give birth, and she bore a son. And her neighbors and relatives heard that the Lord had shown great mercy to her, and they rejoiced with her. And on the eighth day they came to circumcise the child. And they would have called him Zechariah after his father, but his mother answered, โNo; he shall be called John.โ
Luke 1:57-60
It’s a boy! What a joy-filled day it must have been. This wasn’t just any birth. It was God’s promise fulfilled. It was God’s mercy to Elizabeth, His blameless – yet not sinless – and undeserving child. It was God’s blessing to Elizabeth, His faithful servant. The same kind of mercy and blessings He shows us, His faithful, yet undeserving sons and daughters. The same way He fulfills His promises to us.
The time quickly came to circumcise and officially name the baby. Tradition dictated that he be named after Dad: Zechariah. But Elizabeth believed all that God had revealed about this baby to the point that she put her foot down, broke with tradition and insisted, along with her husband, that the baby be named John. It wasn’t about what she wanted. It wasn’t about what others thought was best. It was all about God, and what He wanted.
All of these unbelievable things happening to Elizabeth, yet Elizabeth believes God. Obeys God. Trusts God. She trusted and obeyed God all of those years when He said no, and she believed and obeyed Him after He said yes.
May we, as godly women, be daughters of Elizabeth: Believing God through the unbelievable. Trusting Him in times of uncertainty. Obeying Him in the face of opposition.
This Christmas season, Iโd like to offer you an opportunity to help me give our brothers and sisters in Christ a gift โ a gift that wonโt cost you a dime.
If youโve followed me for a while, you know Iโm passionate about helping people find doctrinally sound churches to join. I’ve recently been updating my list of Reader Recommended Churches, but we can always use more recommendations for doctrinally sound churches, especially in the states that don’t have very many recommendations and in countries outside the United States. Iโve made the list, you check it twice. If recommendations are naught, be nice and make one! :0)
Please read this part…
Please read the guidelines here for submitting a church for consideration. If you have a personal connection to a solid church thatโs not on the list, or if you have a recommendation for a doctrinally sound church search engine or church planting organization that’s not listed here, comment below with:
๐The full, correctly spelled name of the church (or church search engine / planting org.) ๐The city and state, or city and country itโs located in ๐The churchโs (or church search engine’s / planting org’s.) website. Churches and search engines / planting orgs. submitted without a website will not be considered.
Folks, I truly appreciate your recommendations, butPLEASEclick the links above to see if your church or church search engine is already on the list. About a third of the recommendations I’ve received so far are already on the list, and it takes time to weed those out.
How many churches can we add to the list? Letโs add a bunch and make it a merry Christmas for our brothers and sisters who are searching for a new church! Thanks for your help!
(Just a reminder – as it says above the comment box, I handle all comments manually, so your comment will not appear immediately. When I add (or decline to add) your church to the list, I’ll post your comment.)
Last Christmas season I ran a meme series on my social media pages called The Gospel According to Carols. Many of our favorite Christmas carols include the gospel, so this is a series of memes with gospel quotes from Christmas carols to help us keep our focus on the gospel during the hustle and bustle of the season.
The series was so popular last year I decided to run it again this year. If you follow me on social media you’ll see one of the memes below each evening from December 1-24. If you don’t follow me on social media, all of the memes are posted below. The title of the carol precedes each meme(s) and is linked to a YouTube video of that carol. In addition to sharing these around on social media (or using them as your cover photo) to remind ourselves, our friends, and our family of the true reason for Christ’s incarnation, I thought of a few other ways you might like to use these.
Decorative Place Cards
In my article (and podcast) 10 Ways to Share the Gospel During the Holidays, I mentioned printing out these Bible verse memes on thankfulness and placing one at each place setting on your Thanksgiving dinner table as a way of initiating gospel conversations. The Gospel According to Carols memes could be used in the same way at your Christmas party or dinner.
Christmas Cards and Gift Tags
Not crazy about the rapidly dwindling selection of Christmas cards at your local retailer? Choose one or more of these designs, print them out on card stock and use them for Christmas cards. Or, minimize them to gift tag size, add a “to” and a “from,” print them out on card stock, and use them for labeling all your Christmas gifts.
Party Game
Instead of “Name that Tune,” make it “Name that Carol” by reading the quote aloud and having your guests guess which Christmas carol it came from.
When people use the term “X-mas” instead of “Christmas,” isn’t that taking Christ out of Christmas? Should Christians use the term “X-mas”?
What a great Christmas time question! Itโs kind of understandable that people would think that the “X” in X-mas is removing Christ or genericizing Christmas. We use the letter X as an unknown variable in math. We might see a detergent commercial in which one of the bottles is labeled โbrand Xโ instead of its real name. So it can kind of seem like X is a place-filler or that it can stand for practically anything.
But thatโs not the case with the X in X-mas. That X has a finite value. X = 1, the One and only, Jesus Christ. How do we know that?
The “X” in “X-mas” has a finite value. X = 1, the One and only, Jesus Christ.
In Greek, the original language of the New Testament, the word for โChristโ is ฮงฯฮนฯฯฯฯ, which begins with the Greek letter that is essentially the same letter as the English letter X. So, originally, Xmas was simply an abbreviation of Christmas. No grand conspiracy to take Christ out of Christmas. Just an abbreviation.
What this means is that, in the term X-mas, rather than the letter X taking Christ out of Christmas, the letter X actually stands for Christ. It is used in the same way that we might use “H.S.” to stand for “Holy Spirit” or “OT/NT” to stand for “Old Testament” or “New Testament” when we’re writing informally (I’ve never actually heard someone say X-mas, H.S., OT/NT, have you?), we’re pressed for space, and the people in our audience probably know what those letters mean.
Rather than the letter X in “X-mas” taking Christ *out* of Christmas, the letter X actually stands *for* Christ.
But it’s obvious from the number of people questioning the term “X-mas” as “taking Christ out of Christmas,” that most people – in any audience – don’t know what that letter means. So we need to go a bit further.
Is it possible that advertisers or atheists or others with an active, outward animosity toward the things of God are using the term “X-mas” as a way to mention Christmas without actually having to write the letters in the word “Christ”? To intentionally try to “take Christ out of Christmas”? Yes, it’s possible. But it’s a pretty silly thing to do if you think about it. Everybody who sees “X-mas” in their ad or e-mail or whatever they’ve written knows they mean Christmas, they know they mean Christmas, and, as we’ve just seen, the “X” means “Christ”. So what is the ever-lovin’ point? To parade their “Ooooo, I’m gonna stick it to Christians” pettiness and intolerance before the world?
Yes, such people exist, but I really believe, for the moment anyway, that, despite what it may look like on the news or social media, they’re still the fringe minority. It seems to me that most regular non-Christians who use the term “X-mas” simply do so to save time and space in whatever they’re writing. When I Googled “X-mas,” the two main uses I saw for the term were a) articles with titles like, “Why Do People Use X-mas Instead of Christmas?” and b) space-saving product descriptors (ex: xmas tee- red, LS/SS S,M,L) on sales websites.
But what about Christians using the term “X-mas”?
There is nothing fundamentally sinful or unbiblical about using the term “X-mas” (especially since the X stands for Christ) when necessary since there’s no Bible verse or principle that prohibits it. I have occasionally used both “Xmas” and “Xian” (Christian) on Twitter due to the character limit. My audience is mostly mature Christians (many of whom know what X-mas means), and my theology is an open book to the public, so no one could credibly accuse me of trying to take Christ out of Christmas (or Christian).
But there are a couple of other issues we should think about when it comes to the term “X-mas”.
The first issue is weaker brothers. If you’re not familiar with God’s admonition to us to lay down our Christian liberties so as not to wound the faith of new Christians or Christians who have a weakness of conscience in a particular area, I encourage you to study 1 Corinthians 8 and 1 Corinthians 10:23-33.
But take care that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak.
1 Corinthians 8:9
If you know that a recipient of your annual Christmas newsletter or someone at church who sees your flier for the upcoming “X-mas Party” is going to be offended by your use of “X-mas” because they don’t understand that it’s not unbiblical, and that your’e not waging some sort of “war on Christmas,” just don’t use it. Why cause unnecessary offense over something so insignificant? Why not take a small, loving step toward living at peace with our weaker brothers and sisters? (I know it can be tough. I need a lot of improvement in this area, myself!)
The second issue has nothing to do with theology, but as an advocate for good writing, I feel I must mention it. Using “X-mas” in anything but the most informal pieces of writing (text messages, social media posts, a note to your husband, a label on your ornament storage container, etc.) looks sloppy and lazy, especially if your writing reaches a moderate to large audience. If you wouldn’t use abbreviations like “TBH” (to be honest) or “IMHO” (in my humble opinion) in what you’re writing, don’t use “X-mas”.
Merry Christmas!
If you have a question about: a Bible passage, an aspect of theology, a current issue in Christianity, or how to biblically handle a family, life, or church situation, comment below (Iโll hold all questions in queue {unpublished} for a future edition of The Mailbag) or send me an e-mail or private message. If your question is chosen for publication, your anonymity will be protected.
Was Jesus really born in a barn? Did the angels actually sing? How many wise men were there, really?
There are lots of components of the Christmas story that we’ve come to accept as gospel truth, but that the Bible doesn’t actually teach. Here are some great resources to help us better understand the details surrounding the biblical account of the birth of Christ.
Did Mary ride a donkey to Bethlehem?
The Bible doesn’t tell us, so we don’t know for sure. She could have ridden a donkey. She could have ridden in a cart. She could have walked. All Scripture tells us is that Mary and Joseph went to Bethlehem. It doesn’t say how they got there.
Was Mary in active labor when she and Joseph arrived in Bethlehem?
It makes for dramatic nativity movies, but it’s very unlikely. God Himself had given Joseph the enormous and grave task of taking care of Mary and Jesus. You’ve seen first time dads and the weight of responsibility they feel to protect and provide for their wives and their own babies. This was God’s Son. Joseph must have been quaking in his sandals to make sure he got everything right. He certainly would not have waited until Mary was near her due date and risked her delivering the baby in the open country on the trip (not to mention outside of Bethlehem, which would have failed to fulfill prophecy).
Luke 2:6 says:
And while they were there [in Bethlehem], the time came for her to give birth.
“While they were there,” not “as soon as they got there.” “The time came,” not “IT’S TIME, JOSEPH! Find me a room NOW!” The phraseology of this verse suggests that Mary and Joseph spent some time in Bethlehem before Jesus was born. Rather than taking Mary to Bethlehem at the last minute, it’s much more likely that Joseph carefully prepared for the trip, made sure to get there with plenty of time to spare, and made arrangements to stay in Bethlehem until the baby was born.
Was Jesus born in a barn or stable? And what about that innkeeper?
And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.
To our western minds, an inn is like a hotel – a business that rents rooms to travelers. But in biblical times, the cultural rules of hospitality dictated that travelers stay with family, friends, or anyone, even strangers, who would extend hospitality to them. Thus, there was no hotel-like “inn” in Bethlehem, and, of course, no innkeeper.
The Greek word kataluma, usually rendered as “inn” in Luke 2:7 is more accurately rendered “guest room” or “upper room” (of a home) – the same sort of “upper room” Jesus used for the Last Supper. (In fact, the Legacy Standard Bible -one of the most accurate translations available today- renders kataluma as “guest room”, not “inn,” as does Young’s Literal Translation {“guest chamber“}, and several other translations. The ESV cross references Luke 22:11.)
One of Joseph’s relatives would have welcomed him and Mary into their home when they got to Bethlehem. But because Bethlehem was packed with visitors arriving for the census, the guest room of the home they stayed in was likely already full. So instead of giving birth in the crowded upper room of the home, Mary moved to the lower room. This lower room would have had space for the animals to be brought in at night, complete with a feed trough (manger), giving her a convenient cradle for the little Lord Jesus to lay down His sweet head. Jesus was not born in the kind of barn or stable we think of in America and usually see in traditional nativity scenes.
Matthew 2:11 tells us that the magi visited Jesus in a house. I think a strong argument can be made that this was the same house Jesus was born in. Consider the timeline:
Luke 2:4-7: Jesus is born in a house in Bethlehem.
Luke 2:21: Jesus is circumcised (8 days old). Although it’s possible they moved to another house in those eight days, logistically, it seems unlikely.
Luke 2:22-38: Joseph and Mary take Jesus to the temple in Jerusalem for Mary’s purification ceremony (33 days after Jesus’ birth) and for the dedication of their firstborn. Jerusalem was only 6 miles from Bethlehem. Mary and Joseph knew the law and knew they would have to participate in these ceremonies. They were most likely initially planning to return to Nazareth at some point after this, over a month after Jesus’ birth. It would have made the most sense for them to stay put in the house where Jesus was born until after these ceremonies (although, again, the possibility exists that they could have gone to stay at the home of another relative during that time).
Some time elapses. We don’t know how much, but we do know it was under two years because Herod has all the Bethlehemite babies under two years old slaughtered (Matthew 2:16). Though Scripture doesn’t tell us definitively, it’s likely that Herod gave himself some margin for error for Jesus’ age and it was more like one year.
There could be any number of reasons Mary and Joseph stayed in Bethlehem that long – if it was that long – in the same house where Jesus was born (for example: more work opportunities for Joseph, getting out of Nazareth where they might have been suspected of fornication and outcast, etc.), and it was not unheard of for houseguests to stay for extended periods of time.
Matthew 2:1-12: Magi visit Jesus in Bethlehem in a house (11) less than two years after Jesus was born. Again, unless they moved to another relative’s house, it makes sense that they were still staying in the house where Jesus was born. Joseph and Mary were poor, and if their intent was to live in Bethlehem, they might not have gotten settled enough, financially and logistically, to get their own house yet.
Matthew 2:13-15: Flight to Egypt. The way it’s worded it sounds like this happened fairly soon (like, within a couple of days, max) after the magi left.
We can’t say definitively – because Scripture doesn’t say definitively – but the scenario of Jesus being born in the same house the magi eventually visited seems to be a good fit with the details Scripture does definitively give us.
Did Mary ride a donkey to Bethlehem? Was she in active labor when she arrived? Was Jesus born in a barn/stable? And what about that innkeeper? Time to bust some popular Christmas myths!
The cattle are lowing, the baby awakes But little Lord Jesus, no crying He makes
Until I started researching this article, I didn’t realize that some people think Jesus never cried as a baby because of these two lines from the Christmas carol Away in a Manger.
I don’t think that was the hymnist’s intent. The stanza reads as though, in that particular moment when He woke up, Jesus was content and happy, not that He never ever cried.
Furthermore, we know from Scripture that Jesus was not only fully God, He was also fully human. Human babies cry when they’re hungry or tired or sick or in pain or a thousand other scenarios. That’s how they communicate. Jesus was a real live human baby who cried, nursed, spit up, burped, needed His diaper changed, fell down when He was learning to walk, and had to be potty trained. The only type of crying we know He never did was sinful crying – because He didn’t get His own way, because He was angry and frustrated, etc. – since we know Jesus was without sin.
Hark! Did the “herald angels” actually sing?
It’s possible, but we don’t know for sure. We know that the gloria in excelsis deo proclamation was spoken to the shepherds because Luke 2:13-14 says.
And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying, โGlory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!โ
But it also says they were praising God. In the Bible, though praise can be expressed in many ways, singing is one of the most common and natural ways of praising God. So while we know the angels weren’t singing exclusively, there’s no reason they couldn’t have been singing at some point.
At least two (because the Bible speaks of them in the plural), but possibly a whole passel of them. Our minds are set to “three” because the Bible mentions that they brought three gifts: gold, frankincense, and myrrh, because of Christmas carols like We Three Kings, and because every nativity set comes equipped with three wise men. But it’s just as possible that two wise men gave three gifts, or that three gifts were given corporately by a larger group of wise men.
Did Jesus cry as a baby? Hark! Did the “herald angels” actually sing? Just how many wise men *were* there, exactly? Ready to bust some Christmas myths? Check this out!
The end of Luke 2 tells us the story of Mary and Joseph taking Jesus to the temple to offer the appropriate sacrifice for Him as “the first male to open the womb”. While they’re there, Simeon shows up and prophesies over Jesus and Mary. And “at that very hour” Anna also “began to give thanks to God and to speak of him to all who were waiting for the redemption of Jerusalem.” But nowhere does the passage even hint that they were married to each other, or that they even knew one another.
I think a lot of people mentally marry Anna to Simeon because their stories are back to back, because they showed up at the temple at the same time, and because we tend to assume they were both elderly. (Anna was at least 84, but, technically, we’re never told Simeon’s age or that he was elderly.) But verse 37 clearly tells us that Anna “lived as a widow”. She wasn’t married to anyone, including Simeon.
How many babies were murdered in the slaughter of the innocents?
Matthew 2:16 tells us that an enraged King Herod “sent and killed all the male children in Bethlehem and in all that region who were two years old or under” in an attempt to murder Jesus. We tend to think of scores, even hundreds, of babies being murdered in this event which has come to be known as “The Slaughter [or Massacre] of the Innocents.” But as the beloved Christmas carol states, it’s “O little town of Bethlehem”. Bethlehem had a population of approximately 1500. Statistically speaking, scores or hundreds of baby boys age two and under in a population that size would have been impossible. Twelve to fifteen – still a horrifying tragedy- would be more accurate.
Does Christmas have pagan origins, and does that mean Christians shouldn’t celebrate it?
No, and no. Christians celebrating the incarnation of Christ is Christian, not pagan, and Christians are free to celebrate (or not) Christ’s incarnation any day of the year, including December 25.
Do some aspects of the celebration of Christmas find their origin in millennia-old paganism? Possibly. But are you participating in that paganism if you put up a tree or give gifts at Christmas? Probably not. The โChristmas is paganโ lore is so ancient and uncertain that most people arenโt even aware of it. How could you possibly be participating in paganism if youโre not even aware of its existence, you have no intention of participating in it, and it has nothing to do with your reasons for celebrating?
Does Christmas have Catholic origins, and does that mean Christians shouldn’t celebrate it?
Maybe you’ve heard people say that the word โChristmasโ means โChristโs mass,โ so Christmas is Roman Catholic and Christians shouldnโt celebrate it or use the word โChristmasโ.
Itโs true that the word โChristmasโ is a shortened form of โChristโs massโ. It first appeared in English usage as Crฤซstesmรฆsse in 10381, and, at that time, it did refer to the Roman Catholic mass celebrating the birth of Christ.
Youโll note that 1038 was long before the Protestant Reformation. In 1038, Roman Catholicism was the primary manifestation of any form of Christianity. There was no other church. So, at that time, if you were going to refer to a religious observance of the birth of Christ, you naturally would have couched it in Catholic vernacular. You would not have had any other frame of reference for Christianity.
But the word โChristmasโ has come a long way in the last thousand years. It no longer refers exclusively or primarily to a Roman Catholic mass. It refers to all kinds of things surrounding December 25 and the birth of Christ, from a Christmas worship service at your own doctrinally sound church to Christmas sales, presents, trees, carols, 5Ks, parties and everything else under the sun that takes place this time of year. Itโs perfectly fine for Christians to use the word โChristmasโ. I mean, โThursdayโ started out as โThorโs Day“. Itโs actually named after a false god, and none of us bat an eye when it rolls around every week, so why would โChristmasโ be problematic?
But if you have a sensitive conscience and it bothers you to use the word โChristmas,โ why not try on โIncarnation Dayโ and see how it fits? Or maybe โNoelโ? It derives from Old French and means โbirthโ or โbirthdayโ1.
As for celebrating Christmas, itโs not required by Scripture, so you donโt have to observe the day if you donโt want to, but I would plead with you, donโt use โbecause itโs Catholicโ as your reason. Donโt dignify that evil, apostate religious system โ which has sent millions to Hell โ with the power to be a factor in your spiritual decision making. Donโt let it keep you from celebrating the birth of your Lord in the biblical way of your choosing. They donโt have that right, and you shouldnโt give them that power. I would encourage you to read my article Is Christmas Pagan?. Everything in it applies to Catholicism as well.
Does Jeremiah 10:3-4 (and other passages) prohibit Christmas trees?
for the customs of the peoples are vanity. A tree from the forest is cut down and worked with an axe by the hands of a craftsman. They decorate it with silver and gold; they fasten it with hammer and nails so that it cannot move. Jeremiah 10:3-4
Itโs imperative to look to Scripture to make sure that none of our Christmas traditions conflict with Godโs Word. But we need to make sure we’re handling God’s Word rightly and in context.
If we read all of Jeremiah 10, it’s very clear that the entire chapter is talking about idol worship. The English Standard Version even has a little heading at the top that says, โIdols and the Living Godโ.
Verses 3-4 of Jeremiah 10 are not referring to Christmas trees. They’re talking about ancient pagans – not Christians – chopping down trees to create wooden idols to worship, not chopping down a tree and decorating it – as is – in honor of the birth of Christ, or for any other reason. Itโs talking about the crafting of wooden idols.
We know this because of the phrase in verse 3, “worked by the hands of a craftsman”. Some translations render it “a craftsman shapes it with his chisel”. The craftsman carved a piece of wood into an idol which was then often dipped into or plated with gold or silver. This is exactly whatโs being described in verses 8-9:
the instruction of idols is but wood! Beaten silver is brought from Tarshish, and gold from Uphaz. They are the work of the craftsman and of the hands of the goldsmith; their clothing is violet and purple; [the clothing the craftsman would dress the idols in] they are all the work of skilled men.
Idol worship is the “custom of the peoples (pagans) that is vanity,โ as it says in verse 3, and that is what God prohibits in this passage, not Christmas trees.
Neither do the passages of Scripture that refer to idol worship taking place under โevery green treeโ prohibit Christmas trees. I can only surmise this false belief came into being because โevery green treeโ sounds like โevergreen tree,โ which is what Christmas trees are. There are several verses that use this phrase, โevery green tree.โ Hereโs one of them:
You shall surely destroy all the places where the nations whom you shall dispossess served their gods, on the high mountains and on the hills and under every green tree. Deuteronomy 12:2
Again, all of the verses that use this phrase are talking about idol worship, because thatโs apparently where the idol worship took place. The tree itself wasnโt intrinsically evil, itโs the fact that people were using it in their idol worship.
So, unless you’re worshiping your Christmas tree as an idol, or youโre using your Christmas tree as some sort of altar from which to worship an idol, your Christmas tree itself isnโt evil. You donโt have to have a Christmas tree in your house if you donโt want one, but you canโt use these Scripture passages to justify your choice or to bind the consciences of other Believers.
Isn’t using the term “X-mas” somehow taking Christ out of Christmas?
No. But itโs kind of understandable that people would think that the โXโ in X-mas is removing Christ or genericizing Christmas. We use the letter X as an unknown variable in math. We might see a detergent commercial in which one of the bottles is labeled โbrand Xโ instead of its real name. So it can kind of seem like X is a place-filler or that it can stand for practically anything.
But thatโs not the case with the X in X-mas. That X has a finite value. X = 1, the One and only, Jesus Christ. How do we know that?
In the term X-mas, rather than the letter X taking Christ out of Christmas, the letter X actually stands for Christ.
There are lots of myths about Christmas flying around out there. And there are lots of sentimental and striking details of the Christmas story we’ve come to embrace over the years. But it’s imperative that we get our theology from the Bible, not Christmas carols, traditions, and assumptions. Yet even more important than donkeys and stables and trees is why Jesus came – to save sinners like you and me.
The “Advent Traditions” segment of Dr. James White’s podcast is the segment relevant to this article. It runs from 0:00 – 13:44.
Please note, I am not thoroughly familiar with the theology of every site linked above. I have only vetted the specific articles that are linked. I do not endorse anything at the sites above that conflict with my theology as outlined in my “Statement of Faith” and “Welcome” tabs at the top of this page. Please reject any theology you may come across at these sites that conflicts with God’s Word.
