The Memorial of Christ by Frank Walton (wfwalton@juno.com)
"Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter
the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in
heaven" (Matt 7:21).
Men often make a request of how they want to be remembered or
memorialized in their last will and testament. How did Jesus want
us to memorialize Him?
1. Christ's Memorial. Jesus Himself decreed what memorial
Christians should remember Him by. "And when He had taken
some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them,
saying, `This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance
of Me'" (Luke 22:19). The birth of Jesus was merely a means
to a greater redemptive end. The death for our sins of the resurrected
Jesus is the emphasis of His memorial. We observe it weekly, like
the early church, "on the first day of the week" (Acts
20:7, 2:42; Matt 26:29). Sunday is the day of His miraculous resurrection
(Mk 16:9), that proves the validity of His teaching and saving
work (Jn 2:18-22; Rom 1:4). We should bow before King Jesus in
grateful obedience, by respecting His authorized memorial and
following His commands and giving Him devotion as He, not man,
directs (Matt 7:21ff, Lk 9:23). He challenges the superficial
religionist, "Why do you call Me, `Lord, Lord,' and do not
do what I say?" (Lk 6:46).
Jesus wants our life-service, not mere lip-service. He challenges
us to follow Him year-round in loving devotion: "If you love
Me, you will keep my commandments" (Jn 14:15, 15:10). It's
no right for anyone to sing annually, "Oh come let us adore
Him," and then go "ignore" Him by not doing what
He says the rest of the year. Instead of occasionally bowing before
the nativity scene of a cuddly, undemanding baby, let us bow before
the Son of God, who was slain for our sins, and submit to His
gracious authority in all we do. "In whatever you do, do
all in the name of the Lord" (Col 3:17).
American stateman Benjamin Franklin observed: "How many observe
Christ's birthday! How few, His precepts! O! 'tis easier to keep
Holidays than Commandments."
2. Christmas' History. The word "Christmas" isn't
found in the Bible, nor does the Bible reveal the day of His birth.
"Inexplicable though it seems, the date of Christ's birth
is not known" (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 3:656). In fact,
only 2 of the 4 gospel accounts give any details of His birth,
whereas all four give large emphasis to the events leading up
to and including His redemptive death and resurrection. There
is no New Testament injunction or apostolic example in the early
church to observe the birth of Jesus as a religious memorial.
The Catholic Encyclopedia admits, "Christmas was not among
the earliest festivals of the church" (3:724).
So, since the religious observance of Christ's birth isn't in
the New Testament, which should be our rule of faith and practice,
then when did men originate this practice?
For the man-made history of Christmas, the New Catholic Encyclopedia
says, "The birth of Christ was assigned the date of the winter
solstice (December 25 in the Julian Calendar, January 6 in the
Egyptian), because on this day, as the sun began its return to
northern skies, the pagan devotees of Mithra [Persian god of light]
celebrated the birthday of the `Invincible Sun.' On December 25,
274, [Roman Caesar] Aurelian had proclaimed the sun-god principal
patron of the empire and dedicated a temple to him...Christmas
originated at a time when the cult of the sun was particularly
strong at Rome. Some of the church fathers contrasted the birth
of Christ and the winter solstice. From the beginning of the 3rd
century, `Sun of Justice' appears as a title of Christ….The
feast is first mentioned in the Roman almanac of 354 A.D….The
oldest Christmas sermon extant was given...around 383 A.D….It
is not found in the list of feasts given by Tertullian [160-220
A.D.] and Origen [185 -254 A.D.]" (3:656). In 354 A.D., December
25th was adopted as Christ's birthday "by order of Bishop
Liberius of Rome" (World Book Encyclopedia). Hence, The Collier's
Encyclopedia observes, "The church in this way grasped every
opportunity to turn people away from a purely pagan observance
of the winter solstice to a day of adoration of Christ the Lord.
Both Cyrian and John Chrysostom allude to this in their writings."
As for the gradual acceptance of Christmas on December 25th, Chamber's
Encyclopedia reports that "Christmas was only adopted at
Alexandria [Egypt] at 430 A.D. and it was still unknown at Jerusalem
when Jerome wrote early in the 5th century" (3:540). Besides
December 25th and January 6th (as celebrated by the Eastern Orthodox
Church), Clement of Rome (150-215 A.D.) stated that March 25th,
April 19th, April 20th, May 20th and November 17th were popular
days by some to commemorate Christ's birth. (He favored November
17th).
In fact, we know the time of Christ's birth not in the winter
months. Respected Presbyterian commentator Albert Barnes observed
on Luke 2:8 about the shepherds tending their flocks by night
outdoors: "The climate was mild, and, to keep their flocks
from straying, they spent the night with them. It is also a fact
that the Jews sent out their flocks into the mountains and desert
regions during the summer months, and took them up in the latter
part of October or the first of November, when the cold weather
commenced….It is probable from this that our Savior was born
before the 25th of December or before what we call Christmas.
At that time it is cold, and especially in the high and mountainous
regions about Bethlehem. The exact time of His birth is unknown;
there is no way to ascertain it….Nor is it consequence to
know the time; if it were, God would have preserved the record
of it. Matters of moment are clearly revealed; those that He regards
as of no importance are concealed" (Barnes Notes on the NT,
p. 189).
The word itself, "Christmas," comes from the Old English
term "Cristes Maesse" which meant "the mass of
Christ." This reflects Catholic theology, officially beginning
in 1038 A.D., that the Catholic Mass is the unbloodied sacrifice
of the body and blood of Christ. This is a man-made perversion
of the Lord's Supper, in contradiction to Hebrews 7:27 that teaches
Christ's body was offered "once for all" (never to be
repeated).
Christians must resist man-made traditions in favor of strictly
following the pure Word of God (Mark 7:6-13). Let us be content
to observe Christ's weekly memorial of the Lord's Supper, respect
the New Testament as a complete and perfect guide for faith and
practice, and show our devotion to the Son of God by living for
Him daily!
Many claim they have been guided by the Holy Spirit. Others claim they know someone who has been guided by the Holy Spirit. Among these are people who belong to several different religious groups, teaching many different doctrines. Often, the only things they do have in common are the miraculous claims they profess.
Is it not reasonable to say that when one possesses the Holy Spirit, one will agree with the Holy Spirit? And that when one holds to teachings and practices not in agreement with the Holy Spirit; they do not possess the Holy Spirit? How could those who hold doctrines that contradict the Holy Spirit's will, as revealed in the New Testament, claim guidance by the Holy Spirit? Please consider the following examples of such practices and teachings.
1. Instrumental music: When the Holy Spirit specifies singing in worship (Ephesians 5:19), how can one claim the Spirit leads that person as they use instrumental music in their services?
2. Religious titles: The Holy Spirit revealed the words of Christ in Matthew 23:7-12 concerning the use of religious titles among the Jews. Hence, one does not follow the will of the Spirit when using such titles as reverend, father, pastor, etc.
3. The Lord's Supper: The Holy Spirit reveals that early disciples partook of this memorial feast on each first day of the week (Acts 20:7). How can one claim the Spirit is guiding when the feast is offered on any day other than Sunday? Or it is offered bimonthly, yearly, or on special occasions rather than each first day?
These three examples serve as a starting point in understanding that religious leaders make many claims, but such claims do not necessarily follow the will of the Holy Spirit. God has left us His will in the New Testament. It is not appropriate to accept the word of some man when we can read "which the Holy Spirit teacheth."
Which is safer? Listening to the claims of so many different humans (often contradicting one another) or listening to the Holy Spirit speak the words of Christ (God) in the revelation of Christ? Is it better to stand before God and know that what I believed and taught can be found in the written word of God or believe some fallible man whose only claim is that somewhere...somehow God spoke to him? Judge for yourself which is safer.
"If you want to see what children can do, you must stop giving them things."
"The hatred you're carrying is a live coal in your heart - far more damaging to yourself than to the one you hate."
MONTHLY BIBLE READING: Jesus Teaches New Covenant Concepts - The Gospels and Hebrews
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
BIBLE INSIGHT is published for the members of, and
visitors to, the Church of Christ at Beverly Shores, Leesburg,
Florida, USA.
Carey Dillinger is the editor. He can be reached at the church
address or via e-mail: webmaster@careydillinger.com