Posted on 12/07/2005 2:36:38 PM PST by Charles Henrickson
According to conventional wisdom, Christmas had its origin in a pagan winter solstice festival, which the church co-opted to promote the new religion. In doing so, many of the old pagan customs crept into the Christian celebration. But this view is apparently a historical myth—like the stories of a church council debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, or that medieval folks believed the earth is flat—often repeated, even in classrooms, but not true.
William J. Tighe, a history professor at Muhlenberg College, gives a different account in his article "Calculating Christmas," published in the December 2003 Touchstone Magazine. He points out that the ancient Roman religions had no winter solstice festival.
True, the Emperor Aurelian, in the five short years of his reign, tried to start one, "The Birth of the Unconquered Sun," on Dec. 25, 274. This festival, marking the time of year when the length of daylight began to increase, was designed to breathe new life into a declining paganism. But Aurelian's new festival was instituted after Christians had already been associating that day with the birth of Christ. According to Mr. Tighe, the Birth of the Unconquered Sun "was almost certainly an attempt to create a pagan alternative to a date that was already of some significance to Roman Christians." Christians were not imitating the pagans. The pagans were imitating the Christians.
The early church tried to ascertain the actual time of Christ's birth. It was all tied up with the second-century controversies over setting the date of Easter, the commemoration of Christ's death and resurrection. That date should have been an easy one. Though Easter is also charged with having its origins in pagan equinox festivals, we know from Scripture that Christ's death was at the time of the Jewish Passover. That time of year is known with precision.
But differences in the Jewish, Greek, and Latin calendars and the inconsistency between lunar and solar date-keeping caused intense debate over when to observe Easter. Another question was whether to fix one date for the Feast of the Resurrection no matter what day it fell on or to ensure that it always fell on Sunday, "the first day of the week," as in the Gospels.
This discussion also had a bearing on fixing the day of Christ's birth. Mr. Tighe, drawing on the in-depth research of Thomas J. Talley's The Origins of the Liturgical Year, cites the ancient Jewish belief (not supported in Scripture) that God appointed for the great prophets an "integral age," meaning that they died on the same day as either their birth or their conception.
Jesus was certainly considered a great prophet, so those church fathers who wanted a Christmas holiday reasoned that He must have been either born or conceived on the same date as the first Easter. There are hints that some Christians originally celebrated the birth of Christ in March or April. But then a consensus arose to celebrate Christ's conception on March 25, as the Feast of the Annunciation, marking when the angel first appeared to Mary.
Note the pro-life point: According to both the ancient Jews and the early Christians, life begins at conception. So if Christ was conceived on March 25, nine months later, he would have been born on Dec. 25.
This celebrates Christ's birth in the darkest time of the year. The Celtic and Germanic tribes, who would be evangelized later, did mark this time in their "Yule" festivals, a frightening season when only the light from the Yule log kept the darkness at bay. Christianity swallowed up that season of depression with the opposite message of joy: "The light [Jesus] shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it" (John 1:5).
Regardless of whether this was Christ's actual birthday, the symbolism works. And Christ's birth is inextricably linked to His resurrection.
I gather you keep kosher as well?
Happy Hannukka!
Happy Hannukka!
Kosher is a Rabbinical Tradition it is not scriptural.
We will be celebrating the LIGHT entering the world.
b'shem Y'shua
"Kosher is a Rabbinical Tradition it is not scriptural."
Re-read Leviticus, please: no pork, no shellfish, no eating meat boiled in its mother's milk. No eels.
Dietary Kashrut is deeply Scriptural.
Isaiah 12:1 In that day you will say: “I will praise you, O LORD.
Although you were angry with me, your anger has turned
away and you have comforted me.
Isaiah 12:2 Surely God is my salvation; I will trust and not be afraid. The LORD,
the LORD, is my strength and my song; he has become my salvation.”
Isaiah 12:3 With joy you will draw water from the wells of salvation.
Isaiah 12:4 In that day you will say: “Give thanks to the LORD, call on
his name; make known among the nations what he has done,
and proclaim that his name is exalted.
Isaiah 12:5 Sing to the LORD, for he has done glorious things; let this be known to all the world.
Isaiah 12:6 Shout aloud and sing for joy, people of Zion, for great is the Holy One of Israel among you.”
b'shem Y'shua
"Kosher is a Rabbinical Tradition it is not scriptural."
All of that is wonderful and beautiful.
But dietary kashrut is in Leviticus and Deuteronomy.
The same place as the Saturday Sabbath on which you've been so dramatically focused.
dietary kashrut LAWS are is in Leviticus and Deuteronomy
Yes the seventh day is Saturday
"dietary kashrut LAWS are is in Leviticus and Deuteronomy"
Yes, they are.
And a handful of posts up, you said that they were traditions, not Scripture.
You are correct, here, that they ARE Scriptural.
So, now that we have that point of Law settled, and we agree that the dietary laws are Scriptural, I return to my original question: Do you keep kosher?
Happy Hannukka!
Actually I would say we do He stated he would rise in three Day's
He died on Friday before sundown that why that were going to break his leg(but didn't because he was already dead) to speed up up his death to get him down before sundown before the Jewish Sabbath on Saturday (Jewish day run sundown to sundown Saturday Sabbath starts our Friday sundown)
And because no work can be done on the Saturday Sabbath there wasn't time for the all the body prep work and that why Mary was going to the tomb first thing Sunday morning
What about the concept of other high holy days also being a "Sabbath" among ancient Jews? Could there have been a High Sabbath, on Thursday, which would also have no work done in it, followed by the regular Saturday Sabbath?
A little insight as to how there could (or could not be) additional Sabbath days in ancient Judaism would be most helpful.
Not the thread to make that case. Just wanted you to be aware there are other options.
That puts it on Monday. By why quibble when none of the other Disciples believed He would rise by Sunday morning.
There are aspects of "Kosher" that are not "Rabbincal" tradition. Such as refraining from pork and shellfish.
some dietary laws fall under the tradition of Kosher.
I'm still not aware of any other options.
I gave ya one in my first post. Embellishment. Jews believe NT writings are uninspired and embellished. So there you have another option. Obviously you don't believe that but it is another option.
"There are aspects of "Kosher" that are not "Rabbincal" tradition. Such as refraining from pork and shellfish."
More than just aspects!
Practically all of it.
No shellfish.
No fish without scales (i.e., no eels) no animal without a cloven hoof that chews the cud (i.e.: not just pork, but also virtually all mammalian predators, rabbits, etc.).
No meat boiled in its mother's milk (the tradition builds a fence around the Torah and thus requires no meat and dairy together, but the basis of that lies in the prohibition of coddled meat).
No blood. The preparation this requires is important.
Abstention from certain portions of the fat of meat and certain tendons.
No leaven in the house during certain high holy days.
The tradition builds many fences around the Torah and embellishes these rules, to make sure nobody inadvertently breaks them, but God was quite concerned with Jewish dietary practices.
He was also concerned, in the Torah, with Gentile dietary practices. According to the Law given to Noah for all mankind Gentiles can eat meat, but no blood (Maimonedes glosses this to mean no flesh torn from a living animal, per the old Orphic rites).
Now, this is enough for Gentiles to satisfy the Lord, for most Gentiles are descendants of Japheth, and "Japheth is blessed" according to the Torah. So, Japheth may be eating pork, which a Jew under the law of Moses may not, but as a Gentile, it is licit to eat such pork, so long as it does not have the blood in it.
Of course, a strict literalist will point out that ALL meat, however well drained, has blood it it. Ergo, if we are to be strict literalists about the literal words of the Bible, mankind is required to be a vegetarian. Given that God allows man to eat meat, and gives strict rules to Moses for the preparation thereof, the Bible's literal words are in direct contradiction. The solution is to not interpret the first NO BLOOD literally, but take it more figuratively. Once one does that, however, one has departed from Scriptural literalism. And if one does it there with impunity, to resolve a conflict, then one does not have standing any longer to be a priggish literalist in preference to one's own interpretation in some other conflict.
The man who wishes to never be a hypocrite must take the harder rule, and that would force vegetarianism, because God says explicitly that man is not to eat blood.
No, he died on wednesday and rose on sunday. (3 days)
Thats looking at "three days" as he whold rise after being dead 72+ hours
I would look at "in three days" as
he died on Fri. some time before sunset (day 1 / the Day before the Jewish Sabbath)
then Sat.(day 2 / Jewish Sabbath/ end of thet week)
And rose on Sun.(any time after sunset Sat.) (day 3 / the Day after the Jewish Sabbath/first day of the week)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.