Study of Denomintions 08/29/2010

A Study of Denominations
Cont. from last week

The Lord's Supper


The Bread and the Fruit of the Vine

Many denominations teach that the Lord's Supper can be made up of leavened bread and wine. Is this what the New Testament shows?

We must remember that the Lord's Supper was instituted during the Passover. When God commanded the Passover in Exodus 13, He mandates that the bread be unleavened in verse 3:

And Moses said unto the people, "Remember this day, in which ye came out from Egypt, out of the house of bondage; for by strength of hand the LORD brought you out from this place: there shall no leavened bread be eaten."


Thus, the bread that Jesus broke was unleavened, since it was eaten during the Passover. Concerning the "fruit of the vine," the text itself shows what should be used: the fruit of the vine! In the Greek, the phrase used is genematos tes ampelou; this refers to grape juice, not wine (which is more consistently rendered in Greek by oinos). While some may deny that the ancients had the ability to stop fermentation, ancient literature does attest to the consumption of unfermented grape juice. Therefore, there is no reason to deny the New Testament example for the Lord's Supper being unleavened bread and grape juice.
When Should the Lord's Supper Be Observed?
Part A: Weekly

Many denominations teach that the Lord's Supper ought to be observed four times yearly, or maybe monthly; some even believe it ought to be observed daily. How often do we see the Christians in the New Testament observing the Lord's Supper?

We see the example of Paul and other Christians in Acts 20:6-7 :

And we sailed away from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread, and came unto them to Troas in five days; where we tarried seven days. And upon the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul discoursed with them, intending to depart on the morrow; and prolonged his speech until midnight.


Let us consider what we can learn from this text:

1.Paul stayed for seven days; of those seven, the Christians gathered on the first day of the week. The stay of seven days is significant, for we read in verse 16 that Paul was hastening to return to Jerusalem.
2.This particular first day of the week does not seem to have any special connotations; it is a first day of the week that comes between the Passover and Pentecost (cf. Acts 20:6 , 16 ).
3.Their purpose for gathering was to break bread.

"Breaking bread" is metonymy for an entire meal; while it can refer to a common meal (cf. discussion of Acts 2:46 below), it also can refer to the Lord's Supper ( 1 Corinthians 10:16 ). The purpose of this assembly, as we have seen, was to have this meal. Furthermore, we see that after Paul preaches, he "breaks bread" in Acts 20:11 :
And when he was gone up, and had broken the bread, and eaten, and had talked with them a long while, even till break of day, so he departed.


There is no reason to assume that anyone else is eating except for Paul, and that this breaking of bread is not the purposed meal of verse 7. Based on all of this evidence, the best conclusion is that the "breaking of bread" in Acts 20:7 refers to the Lord's Supper, and not a common meal. Likewise, since there is no evidence that this particular first day of the week had any special meaning, we can deduce that the disciples were in the habit of partaking of the Lord's Supper on each first day of the week.

Argument: In Acts 2:46 , we see the first disciples breaking the bread daily. This validates the need of partaking on a daily basis.

Answer: First, the text:

And day by day, continuing stedfastly with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread at home, they did take their food with gladness and singleness of heart.


Context is the best way of deciding whether "breaking bread" refers to the Lord's Supper or a common meal. In this context, the wording shows that these Christians were not partaking the Lord's Supper daily, but eating their meals together daily: "breaking bread...,they did take their food...". The Lord's Supper is most probably in view in Acts 2:42 , where the discussion focuses on more spiritual events.

Argument: Paul establishes that the Lord's Supper can be partaken at any time based on 1 Corinthians 11:26 .

Let us consider 1 Corinthians 11:26 :

For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye proclaim the Lord's death till he come.


Paul is not here telling the Corinthians how often to partake; instead, he is telling them what happens when they partake. "As often as" does not determine how often one actually partakes: it simply establishes that whenever the Lord's Supper is taken, the death of the Lord is proclaimed. We have to look elsewhere to determine how often is "as often as", and the best evidence comes from Acts 20: they met on the first day of the week, which by all evidence seems to be their normal assembly time ( Acts 20:7 , cf. 1 Corinthians 16:1-3 ), and by all accounts they assembled weekly for that purpose. 1 Corinthians 11:26 complements, and does not contradict, the message from Acts 20.

Part B: On the First Day of the Week

Study of Denomintions 08/22/2010

A Study of Denominations
Cont. from last week

The Lord's Supper

The Nature of the Emblems

There are many denominations that teach that the bread and the fruit of the vine are literally the body and blood of Christ. There are two streams of thought concerning how this comes about: transubstantiation and consubstantiation.

Transubstantiation is taught by some denominations, including the Roman Catholic Church and many in the Eastern Orthodox Church; it holds that the bread and the fruit of the vine literally turn into the body and blood of Christ after it is blessed and a Christian partakes of it. The metaphors used in the Gospels and by Paul in 1 Corinthians are essentially literalized. What do the Scriptures say concerning this?

The New Testament--in fact, the whole Word of God-- teaches that the eating of literal blood is an abomination to God. This has been so from the beginning: when God first commanded man to eat the flesh of animals, after the flood in Genesis 9, the only stipulation He made was in verse 4:

"But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat."


This teaching is carried down through the Law of Moses (cf. Leviticus 3:17 ) and then in the covenant under Christ, when the Apostles proclaim it as part of their edict in Acts 15:29 :

That ye abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication; from which if ye keep yourselves, it shall be well with you. Fare ye well.


Therefore, we have seen that from the beginning and even through the time of the Apostles, it has been forbidden for man to drink of blood. If the early Christians understood the fruit of the vine to literally become the blood of Christ, why do we see no exception in the prohibition in Acts 15:29 ? All evidence, therefore, demonstrates that the emblems do not actually become flesh and blood.

Argument: Jesus says explicitly that we must eat His body and drink His blood if we want eternal life. Therefore, the elements of the Eucharist are literally His body and blood.

Answer: Jesus indeed says such things in John 6:53-57 :

Jesus therefore said unto them, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, ye have not life in yourselves. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father; so he that eateth me, he also shall live because of me."


This is said to the Jews long before Jesus establishes the Lord's Supper, and yet He says that they must (presently) "eat His flesh" and "drink His blood". Since He is physically alive at this moment, how can it be possible for them to eat His literal flesh and drink His literal blood?

These questions are easily understood when we consider how Jesus often teaches in the Gospel of John: He constantly uses physical elements to refer to spiritual things, and the people constantly do not understand. Jesus tells the Samaritan woman that she should have requested from Him "living water" ( John 4:10 ), and she continues to think that He refers to physical water ( John 4:11 , 15 ). Yet we see the following in John 4:13-14 :

Jesus answered and said unto her, "Every one that drinketh of this water shall thirst again: but whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall become in him a well of water springing up unto eternal life."


We understand that the water of which Jesus speaks is the Gospel, the Word of life that leads to salvation. There is further evidence of the figurative use of this type of language earlier in John 6: the people seek physical bread, and Jesus explains their spiritual needs using the same image in John 6:33-35 :

"For the bread of God is that which cometh down out of heaven, and giveth life unto the world."
They said therefore unto him, "Lord, evermore give us this bread."
Jesus said unto them, "I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall not hunger, and he that believeth on me shall never thirst."


Would we say from this passage that Jesus is speaking any more "literally" than in John 4? By no means; from Jesus, the Word of God ( John 1:1 , 14 ), comes the Gospel and eternal life, and such is the "bread" and "water" of which Jesus speaks. Since Jesus teaches in this way in John 4:10-14 and 6:33-35 , why should we expect anything different in John 6:53-57 ? The image of eating His flesh and drinking His blood is certainly visceral, but it communicates the essential spiritual message: those who seek eternal life must partake of the salvation that comes forth from Jesus. This is certainly symbolized in the Lord's Supper, but it is an abuse of these passages to deduce that the Lord's Supper is literally the body and blood of Jesus.

Others, including some Lutherans and Eastern Orthodox, accept the consubstantiation view. They affirm that the bread is the literal body of Christ and that the fruit of the vine is the literal blood of Christ, but yet the emblems physically remain as bread and as the fruit of the vine. This approach seems to take a "middle way" that is rather inconsistent: either the bread and fruit of the vine are literally Christ's body and blood or they figuratively/symbolically are His body and blood. This doctrine seems to be an attempt to avoid any negative implications of a symbolic association between bread/fruit of the vine as body/blood while not going so far as the "Real Presence" belief of transubstantiation. Since it is either literal or symbolic, there is no room for the position of consubstantiation!

Furthermore, when we consider the Gospel accounts of the Lord's Supper ( Matthew 26:26-30 , Mark 14:22-26 , Luke 22:15-20 ), we see that it makes the most sense for Jesus to be speaking in figurative language; after all, how can He determine that bread is His body when He is physically present? How can the fruit of the vine be determined as His blood while the blood of Christ still runs through His veins? The bread and the fruit of the vine was to represent for the disciples His body and blood, and they are to represent the same for His disciples today. Representation and actualization, however, remain entirely different matters, and there is no good reason to accept the idea of the actualized body and blood of Christ in the Lord's Supper.

Study of Denomintions 08/15/2010

A Study of Denominations
Cont. from last week

Concerning Observance

Binding No Observance of Christmas?

There are some today who will even bind that no one should celebrate Christmas in any form, even the social and secular aspects of it. Do the Scriptures justify such a stand?

First, it must be said that Christmas is not today nor has it ever been a "Christian" holiday. It has never fully divested itself of much of its pagan origins, and most of the traditions we associate with Christmas actually derive from only the past two hundred years. Furthermore, our modern culture has embraced Christmas as a secular holiday, a time to come together with family and to exchange gifts. Even the court system these days finds no difficulty with state recognition of Christmas; it surely is not "only" religious!

We have previously seen what Paul said about observances in Romans 14:15-16 ; he also says the following in Colossians 2:16-17 :

Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a feast day or a new moon or a sabbath day: which are a shadow of the things to come; but the body is Christ's.


As we can see, Paul says that we are not to condemn or be judged based on the observation (or lack thereof) of any day or any festival. We would do well to remember this in the context of this lesson: while these observances are not authorized in Scripture, we cannot condemn their observation as sin. Therefore, no one has the right to bind the lack of observation of any holiday on another who feels that the holiday is acceptable. Furthermore, no one who observes a holiday has the right to bind that holiday on anyone who does not agree with it.

Therefore, while we ought to respect the convictions of those who do not observe Christmas in any way, and ought not put a stumbling block in their way, such persons also ought to respect the liberty of their brethren to observe the day in a secular manner, and not be quick to condemn (cf. Romans 14:3-21 ).
Observances Concerning the Lord's Death
Ash Wednesday

Toward the end of February, approximately forty days before Easter, the observance of Ash Wednesday is performed in some denominations. Often, the ashes of palm fronds used in the previous year's Palm Sunday ( see below ) are placed on the observer's forehead as a sign of penitence and the cognizance of the mortality of man. This observance is the beginning of the season of Lent.

There are no Scriptures that demonstrate the use of this observance, nor is it ever commanded in Scripture.
Lent

In some denominations, a season of Lent is observed between Ash Wednesday and Easter. The season lasts forty days, and is designed for observers to imitate Christ in the desert ( Matthew 4:1-2 ). In earlier times, observers would fast completely; later, observers would only have to sacrifice any unnecessary indulgences. Today, many are content with sacrificing one or more pleasures. Often, the observers will abstain from the eating of meat, at least on Fridays.

Although the desire to sacrifice and to fast is admirable and is Scriptural ( Acts 13:3 ), we have no Scriptures that authorize such practices for forty days before Easter. It is important to remember that binding abstinence from food was one of the marks of the falling away that was to come ( 1 Timothy 4:3 ). There is no doubt that we ought to sacrifice for our Lord; nevertheless, the Scriptures attest that our sacrifices ought to be complete and constant, and not a trifle for a short period of time (cf. Romans 12:1 , Galatians 2:20 ).
Palm Sunday

In many denominations, the Sunday before Easter is celebrated as Palm Sunday. This observance is done as an imitation of the arrival of our Lord in Jerusalem a week before His crucifixion, as seen in John 12:12-15 :

On the morrow a great multitude that had come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, took the branches of the palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried out, "Hosanna: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord, even the King of Israel."
And Jesus, having found a young ass, sat thereon; as it is written, "Fear not, daughter of Zion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass's colt."


Palm fronds are given to each observer in memory of this event. It is good to remember the events surrounding the arrival of our Lord in Jerusalem and the other events leading up to his death, but we have no indication from the Scriptures that such things are to be re-created or observed in any special way.
Maundy Thursday

Also called Holy Thursday, this day is observed by many denominations as the day before Good Friday, the day in which the Lord instituted the Lord's Supper ( Matthew 26:20-29 ). The Lord's Supper is therefore partaken on this day.

The Scriptures do mention the need to partake of the Lord's Supper ( see above ), but our only example of Christians doing so after the death and resurrection of our Lord is on the first day of the week ( Acts 20:7 ; see The Lord's Supper ). The Lord's Supper takes on an aspect of also remembering the Lord's resurrection on the first day of the week, and it is telling that there are no examples from the Scriptures of anyone observing the Lord's Supper on any Thursday. Again, while it may be beneficial to remember the events leading up to the Lord's death, we find no evidence from the Scriptures that such are to be done on a consistent yearly basis.
Good Friday

Good Friday is observed on the Friday before Easter in many denominations. This recognizes the day in which Christ was crucified, and died. There is much speculation as to whether Christ was crucified on a Thursday or a Friday; it depends if the sign of Jonah as discussed in Matthew 16:4 and the "three days" of John 2:19 are either three full days Thursday/Friday, Friday/Saturday, Saturday/Sunday) or the "third" day (first day Friday, second day Saturday, third day Sunday). Regardless, we have never been given a command to observe the Lord's death on the Friday before Easter in the Scriptures; we have been commanded to observe the Lord's death on the first day of every week by partaking of the Lord's Supper ( Acts 20:7 , 1 Corinthians 11:23-29 ; for more regarding this observance, see The Lord's Supper ).

Easter

Easter is observed between the end of March and the middle of April each year on a Sunday by many denominations as the day of the resurrection of our Lord, as seen in the Gospels (cf. Matthew 28:1-9 ). The date is supposed to be parallel with the Passover and Feast of the Unleavened Bread observance of the Jews, and therefore falls on the Sunday two weeks after the first new moon on or after the vernal equinox.

While we have no dispute that Jesus did indeed die and was resurrected in the midst of the Passover and Feast of the Unleavened Bread observance, the Scriptures never indicate that Christians are to specifically observe this event at this time nor does it provide any examples of Christians doing so. Moreover, the origin of the Easter observance does not come only from the tradition of the death of Christ; the pagans had many festivals concerning the spring equinox, for it is at this time that the Earth becomes green and alive again. The term "Easter" itself comes from the Teutonic [a German tribe] goddess Eaestre, who was a goddess of fertility. The pagan traditions of the rebirth of the land and the Christian tradition of the rebirth of Christ were thus joined by the denominations in the celebration of Easter. The fact that the Lord's Supper is on Sunday, the "Lord's day" ( Revelation 1:10 ), indicates that Christians are to observe and celebrate the resurrection of our Lord on every first day of the week.
Other Observances
Ascension-Pentecost

Some denominations also observe the forty days between Easter and Christ's Ascension ( Acts 1:9 ) and the following ten days until Pentecost (Acts 2). These observances serve to remember the power of Christ and the genesis of the church on Earth. Again, the Scriptures never teach any commandment or example to observe these days.

There are some who may attempt to establish that Christians did indeed observe Pentecost based on Luke's description of events in Acts 20:16 :

For Paul had determined to sail past Ephesus, that he might not have to spend time in Asia; for he was hastening, if it were possible for him, to be at Jerusalem the day of Pentecost.


While it is interesting that Luke records the events in terms of this observance, we must also note that he speaks of the "days of unleavened bread" in Acts 20:6 . Since Paul so often associated with Jews (cf. Acts 17:1-3 ), and he was returning to the Jewish heartland, it should perhaps not surprise us that Luke is telling time on the basis of these observances. We see no indication that Luke or Paul or anyone else is actually observing either the days of unleavened bread or Pentecost; these seem to be used simply as time markers. Furthermore, we have no idea whether Pentecost is being mentioned in terms of the Jewish festival itself or in a "Christianized" form. Despite this use of the term "Pentecost," the Scriptures still remain silent on whether early Christians observed this day as the founding of the church or in any way whatsoever.
Epiphany

According to some denominations, January 6 is observed as Epiphany. This day is considered by these observers to be the day in which Christ was baptized by John ( Matthew 3:13-17 ). This is the beginning of Christ's ministry on Earth; therefore, the Eastern Orthodox celebrate Epiphany at the same level as the Roman Catholics and some Protestant denominations celebrate Christmas. Epiphany is also known as the Twelfth Day, and is observed by some denominations as the day on which the Magi from the East visited Christ (Matthew 2). On a secondary level it is also the observation of the deeds of Christ at the wedding feast in Cana ( John 2:1-11 ).

While it is good to remember these events, the specific day of Christ's baptism, the day of the wedding feast in Cana, nor the day of the arrival of the Magi are precisely fixed in Scripture, and no commandment or example exists for their observance.
Annunciation

Some denominations observe the feast of the Annunciation, or the day wherein Gabriel announced to Mary that she would be impregnated by the Holy Spirit ( Luke 1:26-38 ). This feast is observed on March 25, corresponding to the belief that Christ was born on December 25 (exactly 9 months later). Since the Scriptures are silent on when Jesus was born, by necessity the Scriptures are also silent on when Gabriel visited Mary. It is good for us to remember how Gabriel visited Mary, but the Scriptures make no command or show any example of observing this event.
Days Concerning Saints

In some denominations, days are observed for "saints." A church, like the Roman Catholic Church, will determine what day of the year a certain "saint" (for the purposes of this discussion, the "saint" is one considered canonized by the Roman Catholic Church and/or other denominations) will be honored. Furthermore, November 1 is considered to be All Saints' Day, a day wherein all such "saints" are honored. Concerning saints, please consider Roman Catholicism, II: Traditions Concerning Saints ; since the modern definition of "saint" does not concord to the Scriptural definition of "saint," neither should we expect the Scriptures to endorse the celebration of days regarding them. It can be good to consider the struggles of faith of faithful Christians that have lived since the cross; nevertheless, the Scriptures do not show that we should venerate them in any special way.

The Lord's Supper
A Study of Denominations


Statement of Belief
The Lord's Supper was instituted by Christ on the evening of His arrest,
And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it; and he gave to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is my body."
And he took a cup, and gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, "Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is shed for many unto remission of sins. But I say unto you, I shall not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom" ( Matthew 26:26-29 ),


and He desired that it should be done to commemorate His death,

For I received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, how that the Lord Jesus in the night in which he was betrayed took bread; and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said,
"This is my body, which is for you: this do in remembrance of me."
In like manner also the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me."
For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye proclaim the Lord's death till he come ( 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 ),


and that it ought to be commemorated weekly,

And upon the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul discoursed with them, intending to depart on the morrow; and prolonged his speech until midnight ( Acts 20:7 ).

Sections

● The Need for the Lord's Supper
● The Nature of the Emblems
● The Bread and the Fruit of the Vine
● When Should the Lord's Supper Be Observed?
○
○ Part A: Weekly
○ Part B: On the First Day of the Week
●
● The Number of Loaves and Cups
● Other Resources


The Need for the Lord's Supper
There are some denominations who teach that the Lord's Supper is not a physical event, but is a "spiritual" communion, not requiring actual bread and fruit of the vine. Is the Lord's Supper in the Scriptures a physical act or a uniquely "spiritual" one?
We can see that physical bread and fruit of the vine was taken by Christ in Luke 22:19-20 :
And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and gave to them, saying, "This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me."
And the cup in like manner after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, even that which is poured out for you."


Paul confirms that the Lord revealed the same to him in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 , and even speaks in detail concerning the nature of the Lord's Supper in 1 Corinthians 11:27-29 :

Wherefore whosoever shall eat the bread or drink the cup of the Lord in an unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself, and so let him eat of the bread, and drink of the cup. For he that eateth and drinketh, eateth and drinketh judgment unto himself, if he discern not the body.


If the Lord's Supper does not involve physical elements, why does Paul speak of "eat[ing] the bread" and "drink[ing] the cup" of the Lord? If the Lord's Supper is only a spiritual communion, why does Luke speak of the original Lord's Supper in the context of the Passover meal? The Scriptures indicate clearly that the Lord's Supper is most certainly a physical act that Christians ought to perform.

The Nature of the Emblems

Study of Denomintions 08/01/2010

A Study of Denominations
Cont. from last week

Instrumental Music


Early Witnesses Concerning Instrumental Music

This section provides earlier witnesses to the lack of instrumental music within "Christian" churches. It must be remembered that instruments were only first used in the seventh century and were only popularized in the nineteenth. I do not present this material thinking that its authors are infallible, nor should it be assumed that I accept all things that these individuals wrote. The following represent witnesses to the practices of the early "Christendom."

The one instrument of peace, the Word alone, by whom we honor God, is what we employ. We no longer employ the ancient psaltery, trumpet, timbrel, and flute. For those expert in war and scorners of the fear of God were inclined to make use of these instruments in the choruses at their festive assemblies (Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, 2.4).

What trumpet of God is now heard-- unless it is in the entertainments of the heretics? (Tertullian, Against Marcion, 5.24.13).

One imitates the hoarse, warlike clanging of the trumpet. Another with his breath blowing into a pipe regulates its mournful sounds...Why should I speak of...those great tragic vocal ravings? Why should I speak of strings set with noise? Even if these things were not dedicated to idols, they should not be approached and gazed upon by faithful Christians (Novatian, On the Public Shows, 7).

[Satan] presents to the eyes seductive forms and easy pleasures, by the sight of which he might destroy chastity. He tempts the ears with harmonious music, so that by the hearing of sweet sounds, he may relax and weaken Christian vigor (Cyprian, Treatise X: On Jealousy and Envy, 2).

Sometimes I avoid [the error of listening to melodies more than the words] in an intemperate fashion, and I err by an excess of severity. Then I strongly desire that all the melodies and sweet chants with which David's psalter should be banished from my ears and from the Church itself. Then I think that the safer course is what I remember has often been related to me about Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria. He made the reader of the psalm utter it with so slight a vocal inflection that it was more like speaking than singing (Augustine, The Confessions, 16.33.50).

I am inclined rather to approve the practice of singing in church, although I do not offer an irrevocable opinion on it, so that through the pleasure afforded the ears the weaker mind may rise to feelings of devotion. However, when it so happens that I am moved more by the singing than by what is sung, I confess that I have sinned, in such wise as to deserve punishment, and at such times I should prefer not to listen to a singer...(Augustine, The Confessions, 16.33.50).

While such persons are not inspired, their collective witness demonstrates clearly that the use of instruments in the assembly was foreign to "orthodox Christianity" in its first few hundred years. The practice, therefore, does not originate either in the New Testament or in early Christianity.

++++++++++++++++++++++++

Concerning Observance
A Study of Denominations


Statement of Belief
In general, the Scriptures indicate no specific festivals or specific observances for Christians save the assembly on the first day of the week to break bread ( Acts 20:7 )
The Scriptures make no commandment or memorial to honor the birth of our Lord; the Scriptures do not even mention the date of His birth.
Concerning the Lord's death, the only memorial He has established for it in the Scriptures is the Lord's Supper,
And He said unto them, "With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer: for I say unto you, I shall not eat it, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God."
And He received a cup, and when he had given thanks, He said, "Take this, and divide it among yourselves: for I say unto you, I shall not drink from henceforth of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come."
And He took bread, and when He had given thanks, He brake it, and gave to them, saying, "This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me."
And the cup in like manner after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, even that which is poured out for you." ( Luke 22:15-20 ).

Sections

● Observances and the "Church Year"
● Observances Concerning the Lord's Birth
○ Advent
○ Christmas
○ Binding No Observance of Christmas?
● Observances Concerning the Lord's Death
○ Ash Wednesday
○ Lent
○ Palm Sunday
○ Maundy Thursday
○ Good Friday
○ Easter
●
● Other Observances
○
○ Ascension-Pentecost
○ Epiphany
○ Annunciation
○ Days Concerning Saints
●


Observances and the "Church Year"
Over the course of the history of "Christendom," many special observances in many forms have been established. These observances, in theory, attempt to celebrate many events in the life and death of Jesus, the founding of the church, and celebrations of various individuals over time. In many cases, these observances represent a "Christianizing" of previously pagan festivals: since the pagans would not give up their festivals, religious authorities simply provided a new Christian veneer.
None of the observances concerning which we are about to speak derive from the New Testament proper. We see no evidence from the New Testament that the Christians observed any of the observances described below. This silence is quite telling, especially considering their modern popularity.
In discussions such as these, however, it is important to remember Romans 14:5-6 :
One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let each man be fully assured in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord: and he that eateth, eateth unto the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, unto the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thank.


While we find no Scriptural reason to observe many of these festivals and other observances, the vast majority of them most likely fit into the description here in Romans 14:5 . Taking out particular days to remember events in the life of our Lord are not wrong or sinful; they are not, however, to be bound upon others.

The collection of most of the popular observances (Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Annunciation, Ash Wednesday, Lent, Palm Sunday, Good Friday, Easter, Ascension, Pentecost) comprise what is often called the "church year" in many denominations. Since these observances normally fit between November and July, they do not represent much of a year proper. Nevertheless, such a concept is not grounded in the Scriptures, and we see no reason to limit remembrance of various aspects of the Lord's life and death to particular times of the year.
Observances Concerning the Lord's Birth
Advent

In some denominations, a season called Advent is observed. It begins either on November 11 or on the fourth Sunday before Christmas, and it is a season to meditate upon the prophecies concerning the Christ. Many times, the observers will have calendars for Advent and will read certain Scriptures concerning the prophecies as outlined by their denomination.

While it may be beneficial to spend some time considering the prophecies regarding the Christ, the Scriptures teach nothing concerning doing so. We are to always remember the Lord's life and His deeds on our behalf, especially in the observation of the Lord's Supper (1 Corinthians 11:26).
Christmas

In many denominations, December 25 is observed as Christmas (from the Old English christes maesse, "festival of Christ"). Christmas has its roots in pagan festivals, notably the Saturnalia of the Romans and concerning Mithras of the Persians, as a celebration of the winter solstice and the "rebirth" of the Sun. Read what Tertullian, a "church father," has to say of such things:

The Saturnalia, New Year, Midwinter festivals, and Matronalia are frequented by us! Presents come and go! There are New Year's gifts! Games join their noise! Banquets join their din! The pagans are more faithful to their sect...For, even if they had known them, they would not have shared the Lord's Day or Pentecost with us. For they would fear lest they would appear to be Christians. Yet, we are not apprehensive that we might appear to be pagans! (On Idolatry 14).

The pagan origin of this festival, then, is confirmed, and that Christians were observing such things to their shame is also attested. The date of December 25 was arbitrarily fixed to coincide with these festivals in order for them to be "Christianized." Clement of Alexandria has the following to say concerning the birth date of Christ:

Therefore, from the birth of Christ to the death of Commodus [Ed. note: Commodus was emperor of Rome in the second century] are a total of one hundred ninety-four years, one month, and thirteen days. There are those who have calculated not only the year of our Lord's birth, but also the day. They say that it took place in the twenty-eighth year of Augustus, on the twenty-fifth day of Pachon [May 20]...Others say that He was born on the twenty-fourth or twenty-fifth day of Parmuthi [April 19 or 20] (Stromata, 1:21).


The Scriptures do not fix the specific day of the birth of our Lord, nor even its season. We do not know when He was born, but all evidence we do have points to either spring or fall. December 25 surely is not the day of the birth of our Lord.

The fact that Scripture does not teach the day on which our Lord was born is significant: it demonstrates clearly that we have no commandment, example, or inference that we ought to celebrate the day of the Lord's birth over any other day. There is no authorization for the religious observance of Christmas.

Binding No Observance of Christmas?