Sometimes Christians argue about whether or not we should celebrate Christmas. In fact, at various times in Church history, a celebration of the birth of Christ has been outlawed. I would respectfully beg to differ with those folks. Look at the arrival of the Savior.
The first thing we read is that the number one angel, Gabriel, arrived on the scene to tell Mary that she would bear a child, the Son of God. No small thing. There aren't a lot of instances where God sends direct emissaries to do announcements like this. Some time later, God repeats this remarkable event to tell her betrothed, Joseph, the same thing, compounding the unusual nature of the event.
The Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem, so God saw to it that a pagan Caesar instituted a census and the Messiah in utero arrived in Bethlehem just before His birth. On the night He was born, it wasn't just the parents in their "stable for a room" lodgings that celebrated this arrival. It was also shepherds. So ... how did shepherds -- some of the lowliest folks in the culture -- get in on this event? God sent an angel to tell them and accompanied that angel with "a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying, 'Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, goodwill towards men'" (Luke 2:13-14). You must admit, that's quite a celebration.
It didn't end there. God also put up a special star. Magi from the East saw the star, recognized it as the special sign it was, and followed it all the way to the child's door. They brought gifts for the King, celebrating His arrival. Yes, this birth was celebrated locally as well as internationally. Indeed, the biggest celebration was that put on by God.
Now, look, if you can find a single birth in the history of mankind that had that kind of a birthday celebration from God Himself, then I think you could safely argue that we should also celebrate that birthday. If, on the other hand, you would argue, "No, we shouldn't be celebrating this birthday," it would seem that you are arguing, "God made a mistake." "Oh," you protest, "it's not the birthday celebration that bothers us. It's the fact that it's not His birthday." The wise men didn't actually arrive on the birthday either. They arrived when they got there. And it was a valid celebration anyway.
It's Christmas today. We recognize it as the day we celebrate the King who came to bring us salvation. It was celebrated by parents, shepherds, wise men, and angels. And it was a unique event on the planet. Celebrate with me today. It is truly a day to decare, "Glory to God in the highest."
2 comments:
In partial defense of the (implied) criticism of the Puritans, much of what they decried about "celebration" of Christmas in their day was the drunken revelry and lingering Roman Catholic aspects to the observances. But I will grant that they went to the opposite extreme.
In my examination of the topic, those were the two interesting points that leapt out at me: excess and connection to the Roman Catholic church. Funny thing, too, because I'd agree with those. Today's version, I'd suggest, is no longer connected to Roman Catholicism. And we all complain, it seems, about the excess.
More people today complain because of the ties to pagan origins. I'd still argue -- with the moderns or the Puritans -- that God Himself did quite a celebration, so I'm in favor of celebrating the coming of the Savior. What do I care if it's December 25th? Pick another day. :)
Post a Comment