Sound evangelical counsel but as a RC you cannot practice objectively searching the Scriptures in order to ascertain the veracity of something Rome has settled, or as if revealed truth does not come, and can come, only by way of external authority (Rome), and not by way of private judgment and investigation. Search "The intolerance of the Church" in post 362
Of course, the pagans also used altars, and also made sacrifices on those altars in their worship. Do you think God was telling the Childen of Israel that they should not use altars, or make sacrifices on those altars, because the pagans used altars and offered sacrifices on them?
Of course not: these were basic things the pagans highjacked, while things like praying to someone else but the Lord in Heaven, or rounding the corners of your heads, (Lv. 19:27) were distinctively pagan. Likewise a feast to a pagan God on or around Dec. 25. (An extensively examination of copycat theories is here .)
Note that God can use things that were seen among , perhaps such as distinctive priestly garments, but as with making graven images, this is by His order, not that of making unto yourselves such things. But again, God makes new creations, and Christianizing the feast of Saturnalia makes somethings that be reclaimed for God, as it was a tree (so to speak) He did not plant. As said, commemorating the birth of Christ (for which Dec.is unlikely) as the Lord leads is one thing; borrowing a day specific to the pagans and Christianizing it as an annual feast say is another, and allows it to easily be reclaimed for idolatry .
Thus the ongoing effort to "put Christ back into Christmas," as if this was a day He ordained believers to keep, rather than letting it die of neglect among believers. God does not reform the flesh, but has it crucified, and new creations do not need to borrow distinctly pagan religious celebrations with its retained distinctly pagan elements to worship God.
It also amounts to legalism, as any dissent from keeping this feast is effectively disallowed. Even in most evangelical churches a man will never advance in leadership if he desires to walk in liberty to worship God as seen in Scripture, versus submitting to a annual season of observance which was only seen among pagans, and not in Scripture. A pastor can preach as the Lord leads 11 months out of the year, but come Sept. he basically must conform to an extra-Scriptural tradition which is the result of an unScriptural attempt to reform a distinctively pagan celebration which still is recognizable as such in its elements (bowing before a tree, etc.).
"But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. " (Galatians 4:9-10)
I think the censure here goes beyond doing so as part of an admixture of law and grace, but extends to an admixture of pagan worship and that of the New Cov. And in which we see no liturgical seasons, and a worship service that is hardly typical today, (1Cor. 14) in its manner of participatory aspects.
However, insofar as Christ is exalted, then there can be some edification, for the truth of God is potent even in an admixture of Christianity and paganism, thus souls may be saved by a Christian message in a hard rock concert, but such are not the right ways of the Lord.
See how the true, full, honest context totally changes that passage, and shows you much more clearly what it really, truly means than the misleading fragment you keep posting?)
Of course God opposed paganism because it was evil, and thus He condemned holding on to distinctively pagan practices that were part of it (Gal. 4:10), and that would lead them back to it, such as worshiping in the high places. Thus the true, full, honest context does not change the passage (Deuteronomy 12:30) from applying to attempts to Christianize pagan celebrations, as a 'competitive strategy.' to allow pagans to keep their distinctly pagan days and practices in an an adapted Christian form. I think God wanted them to abandon it, and worship God as He led, not re-form a pagan celebration.
Thus it is true, in a certain sense, that some Catholic rites and ceremonies are a reproduction of those of pagan creeds; but they are the taking of what was best from pagan- ism...
There are some things that God wants utterly destroyed, but someone else also had Rome's idea of wht to do with paganism:
"And Saul said, They have brought them from the Amalekites: for the people spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen, to sacrifice unto the Lord thy God; and the rest we have utterly destroyed. " (1 Samuel 15:15)
"And Samuel said, Hath the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams. " (1 Samuel 15:22)
Then you keep quoting this passage from some guy's book which is most certainly NOT a book about the teachings/beliefs/doctrines of the Catholic Church:
The book i presume is at issue is is by a priest describing what the Christianized observances were before, and thus it is about the teachings/beliefs/doctrines of the Catholic Church. If not, where is the censure of the highly exalted RC magisterium whom we are told works to ensure unity?
The RCC specifically states that taking something from the pagans to worship God is exactly what they did."
No they most certainly do not say that anywhere in that passage, or anywhere else! Where the heck do you see that?!?!?
Well, in confessions as this:
Some Christmas Customs. When we give or receive Christ- mas gifts, and hang green wreaths in our homes and churches, how many of us know that we are probably observing pagan customs? We do not wish to assert that they are not good customs; but they undoubtedly prevailed long before Christian times.
Everything a believer does to honor God is worship and applies here, not just to the formally ceremonious, and all is to be in accordance with His word. And motive is not enough to do so rightly, and thus while becoming all things to all can allow one to adopt the clothing of the country of India, it should not sanction wearing the tilaka, even if a Christian meaning is ascribed to it. I think 2 Corinthians 6:17 may apply here. "Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, "
But thank you for trying to being reasonable, and i respect your motive to honor God. How one is saved is more important, and thus my tag line.
Thank you for sharing your insights, dear daniel1212!
Once again. Well done daniel1212!
Which is exactly what we see happening to Christmas these days.