Christmas Tree, Santa Claus, December 25th...Paganism? - Rev. Jethro Rachmadi

Our discussion today is on three Christmas-related matters that Christians find greatly controversial. The first one being Santa Claus, the second on Christmas tree—having no connection whatsoever with Nativity, obscuring and tainting the true meaning of Christmas—and the third and most recent case, the December 25th dating system, which originated from pagan European beliefs during the 1st century onward. For example, the cult of the sun during the Roman Empire is believed to determine the dating of December 25th (Sol Invictus). Thus, based on the said arguments, Christians argue that such a paganistic dating system should be disregarded. Or should we?

DISCLAIMER

Today's discussion is not intended to attack the opposing argument. It is never our objective to observe how others reason, but how we reason. Let us remember to carry such a state of mind as we begin our discussion. Today, I would like us to understand that the issues are far more complex than they seem on social media and the articles we read. Today's discussion should allow us to be still and meditate on how this discussion may impact us, instead of blasting it on social media with the pride of knowledge. As a disclaimer, we pursue not the answer to whether Christmas trees and Santa Claus are permissible or not. If shortly we find out that the December 25th dating and Christmas trees are products of Christianity-baptized pagan cultures, this will not and should not shake our faith. I have previously discussed on another occasion the use of the term evangelism and how it is derived from the word Evangelion (Roman), which means the good news of the birth of a new Roman emperor. The term, Evangelion, being more than just a historical term, is very much actually a religious and pagan term, for the emperor was considered the highest among gods. Yet to our surprise, the Bible has never avoided the term Evangelion despite its origin. If the Bible disregards the stigma of using pagan cultures or elements for the sake of the gospel, our view should be the same in terms of Christmas tree or the dating of December 25th. In fact, I do not completely believe December 25th to be the exact date of Christ's birth anyway.

Ω

DECEMBER 25TH

The dating of December 25th is claimed to be originated from the pagan calendar of Sol Invictus (the invincible sun, a cult of the sun sect of the Roman Empire. Aurelian, a Roman Emperor of the year 270-275 AD, dedicated December 25th particularly to worship the sun god in a temple. So, December 25th is just a title we give as opposed to the actual birth date of Christ. But is the claim that such dating is adopted from paganism true?

My material today is based on Thomas J. Talley's "The Origin of the Liturgical Year". Talley discovered that the claim that December 25th is of pagan origin in the 17th-18th century, because of the scholars named Jablonski and Hardwin. Both scholars used this data to support two different ideas. Jablonski wrote, "see how the Christians have compromised and begin to adopt pagan dating, therefore we must avoid the date December 25th". On the other hand, Hardaway wrote, "see how the Christians and the church contextualize with the local culture without causing herself to be unclean". Talley observed that this culture does not originate from the church fathers, yet in both of these scholars' writings, we capture one common idea; the specialty of the date December 25th.

The use of the date December 25th began in 45 BC (Before Christ), during the reign of Julius Caesar (according to the Julian calendar), when the date December 25th was marked as the winter solstice. Winter solstice is a solar equinox, a day when the duration of day increases as compared to the duration of night. As the day shortens, we would not have 12 hours of day and 12 hours of night, but perhaps 11 hours of day and 13 hours of night. By then, the winter solstice was a significant phenomenon in astronomy, but not in religion. Not until Aurelius Caesar set that particular date in Rome as a date to worship the sun (Sol Invictus) in 274 AC (After Christ). We then later discover that the first record of Christmas being celebrated on December 25th was in the year 336 AC. It is clear that the date December 25th was first used for religious purposes during the era of Aurelian and that Christians adopted it afterward.

This is the data which we obtain from Jablonski and Hardaway, but Talley discovered one other fact: between 45 BC and 274 AC, the date December 25th was no longer used for the purpose of Sol Invictus or any other religious purposes. In fact, it was written on the walls of the two Roman temples before the era of Aurelian, and that the dedication towards Sol Invictus was celebrated on August 9th and 28th anyway, instead of December 25th. So, December 25th paganistic significance must have occurred after the era of Aurelian. Such was Talley's first discovery.

Second, he discovered the difference between the celebration and the dating calculation. True that Christians first celebrated Christmas on December 25th in 336 AD after the era of Aurelian, yet the question that Talley raised was whether or not Christians have used the December 25th dating before Aurelian set the date as Sol Invictus in 274 AD. Could Christians have used the December 25th dating before Aurelian's era, but not the Christmas festival? If we could prove that Christians have done so before Aurelian did, we may then claim that Christians did not adopt this dating system from paganism. It turns out that Talley found out that both the eastern and western churches, the churches of Alexandria or Constantinople have attempted to calculate the birth date of Jesus before Aurelius did, which was in the 2nd century (Aurelian's dating was in 274 AC, which was equivalent to the 3rd century).

This fact is well-supported by textual evidence. In the year of 170-20 AD, before Aurelius commented on the book of Daniel, Hippolytus said that God was born in Bethlehem 8 days before the Kalends of January (December 25th). This is interesting because the calculation was done by the western church, while the eastern and western churches date Christmas differently. The eastern church, which we know today as eastern orthodox, considers January 6th or 7th as Christmas day, which has also been proven to be calculated before the Aurelian era. This was written by Clement of Alexandria, a bishop, from the book The Stromata / Miscellanies, according to his discovery in the year 200 in his very own eastern church. We now know through textual evidence that Christians have calculated the dating of December 25th despite not celebrating it. But why did they not celebrate it? Because interestingly, their attempt to calculate one's birth date is merely to point to one's death and resurrection days. This is because, for the church in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd centuries, the most fundamental day for Christianity is not the birth of Christ, but His death and resurrection. Knowing this fact, they began to wonder if they could too calculate one's birth. Their initial purpose was so they could celebrate good Friday and easter, it was much later that they began to calculate Christ's birth date as well.

This is the reason why there is a discrepancy between the date calculation and the celebration. During the era of Tertullian in 155 AD (before Aurelian), the western church set Friday, March 25th in 29 AD as the date of Christ's birth,  while the eastern church on April 6th in 29 AD. These calculations yield the dates December 25th and January 6th. Calculating one's birth date by figuring out one's death day is a concept called integral age in Judaism. This is not based on the Scripture, but merely on how people think at the time. They also had a belief that the great prophets died on the same date as the date they were conceived. So, they set March 25th as the annunciation day (conception day), because they believed March 25th was the day Christ died. Add 9 months from the conception day, you would have December 25th. The eastern church held the same belief: Adding 9 months to April 6th would give us January 6th. 

In conclusion, the main purpose of this study is not a matter of historical accuracy. We merely attempt to find out whether December 25th is derived from a Christian-baptized pagan culture. Yet it is not the case according to Talley's research, for such calculation has been dated to be conducted prior to 274 AD, although the celebration was held afterward. Therefore, it could be concluded that Aurelius was the one who adopted the date from Christians and not vice versa.

In the present-day context, we need to learn that such claims are mere hypotheses. The point of all this discussion is not so we hate Jablonski and Hardwin, to support Talley, nor to mock the pagans for adopting our date. We have just seen the data and our theses may differ, this is called science, and science grows. Through this discussion, we do not wish to decide which date is correct. What we wish is to learn the reason behind labeling such dating as pagan or as Christian. All the hypotheses which we have just discussed will continue to grow in time. We should not be satisfied with either conclusion A or conclusion B, and that we have to ceaselessly learn different interpretations. This is the true definition of a reformed church, semper reformanda, consistently re-form-ing. If one day, there is another Biblical teaching that rather opposes that of Calvin's, we must be bold to refrain from Calvin. Our heart is constantly in search of one sole unchanging individual, one sole unchanging theory, but this is the very Roman Catholic principle which Luther was against. Taking hold of tradition without having a reforming heart is not being reformed after all. We have to constantly evaluate and correct our interpretations.

CHRISTMAS TREE

Some Christians often sneer at the sound of Christmas Trees and Santa Claus for they have the danger of shifting us into idolatry. This is based on realistic reasoning for it may indeed fade away the true meaning of Christmas. We have witnessed this in the world of commercialism, how people around the world, regardless of their beliefs, may celebrate Christmas without having anything to do with Christ, and by so have drifted us away from the true meaning of Christmas.

First of all, what is idolatry? Which should we consider an idol and which should we not? Being raised such a question, our mind would often be focused on the object which may be associated with idolatry, for instance for us Indonesians, the ash of Mount Kawi. Regardless of its user, the ash itself holds a mystical sense of idolatry. Or try to make sense of the following sentence: An idol is something good, in fact, the better something is, the more prone it will be to become an idol. We even focus on the object in the previous sentence, and not on its user. Today, I would like you to see how the image of idolatry is not as simple as observed in light of the Biblical paradigm.

Bodily Worship: Ordinary, Repetitive...and a Life-Changer - Rev. Jethro Rachmadi

PREFACE

This sermon note is an excerpt from a sermon series entitled Bodily Worship by Rev. Jethro Rachmadi on the account of online worship. As the world is partly shut down due to the pandemic, churches around the world find a solution in technological aid to continue religious services. And for some people, such abnormality might even be considered a more efficient way of worshipping and should therefore be the post-pandemic new normal of worshipping".

By addressing this issue, we do not by all means force or promote shaming towards those who choose not to come to bodily services during the pandemic, because some congregants may live with elderlies or juveniles, doctors or nurses, or simply would like to be more cautious for themselves.
Our sole purpose in addressing this issue is to acknowledge that online worship is an inevitable abnormality that we must all hope and pray to return to normal bodily worship.

This is the fourth session of the Bodily Worship series. Previous sessions talk about how liturgy exists inside and outside of the church gate and how liturgy takes a big role in shaping the hearts of men. Though ordinary, liturgy is a double-edged sword that powerfully and actively changes its doer down to men's most inner desire. We know that the heart reflects men's desire, but it's almost as important to remember how the heart also plants men's desire. After all, we are what we desire, or more relationally, Who we desire.

For more information on the prior sessions, please click on the link below:

Bodily Worship #1: https://griikg.org/bodily-worship/
Bodily Woship #2: https://griikg.org/bodily-worship-2/
Bodily Woship #3: https://griikg.org/bodily-worship-3/

Ω

BODILY WORSHIP: ORDINARY, REPETITIVE...AND A LIFE-CHANGER

1. The Derision towards the Ordinary

Our Lord works through ordinary things. You might have even heard of this parable of a city that was drowned in a big flood. A man sought safety on the roof of a house, as he prayed, "Lord, have mercy on me and be quick to save me!" Not long after, a man in a wooden boat rowed towards him as he offered a seat on his boat. But the man shook his head saying, "Sorry, sir. I've prayed to God to save me. He will be the one who saves me". And so the wooden boat left him. Soon after, a navy boat approached him and threw a rope towards him, but the man rejected the rope for the same reason. Finally, a helicopter hovered above him and with a loud voice a soldier cried, "Sir, take hold on the ladder, we will pull you up, the water has reached your neck!" But the man replied, "No, sir. God will be the one who saves me Himself". At the end of the day, the man died and went to heaven. He asked God why He did not save Him, and God said, "I sent you a wooden boat, a navy boat, and a chopper, but you refused. You waited for an extraordinary rescue, while I work through the ordinary."

Romans 10:17 says that "[...] faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the Word of God", but let us go back to its preceding verses, "and how are they to hear without someone preaching?" (verse 14b). Someone preaching the Word is an ordinary act. We constantly expect spectacular repentance testimonies. Honestly, nobody wants to hear, "I came to believe in the Lord Jesus by reading the Bible for 20 years, or by coming to the Sunday School diligently as a kid." The story that we want to hear is of a murderer who repents. But even when we study such extraordinary testimony, there is always an ordinary matter that we missed. Say that murderer repented because when he was imprisoned, he happened to find a piece of small paper that happened to be torn from a Bible. But surely somebody had to first bring a Bible to the prison, somebody else had to print the Bible and somebody had to translate it to another language. And how are they to hear without someone preaching?

When we go to a doctor's appointment, nobody wants to be prescribed you just need enough rest, some vitamin C, exercise regularly, and don't forget to hydrate. What we wish to hear is us needing a super dose of vitamin C or other extraordinary solutions.

Finally, have you not noticed that it is through ordinary things that the God we know in our Bible creates the most extraordinary things?

The Reason for Suffering - Pdt. Jethro Rachmadi

Kita sering dengar pertanyaan, "kenapa sih Tuhan kasih COVID-19 ini?", dan kita sering resah untuk mendapatkan jawabannya. Kita harus berhati-hati dengan menuntut jawaban terhadap semua pertanyaan-pertanyaan kita. Kadang, kita nggak harus mengetahui segala sesuatu.

Memang, Tuhan tempatkan banyak beautiful things di dunia ini untuk kita ketahui dan pelajari. Dia kasih kita Taman Eden. Tapi juga ada hal-hal yang kita tidak perlu ketahui, seperti rasa buah pada pohon pengetahuan yang baik dan jahat itu.
Inilah perbedaan antara bijaksana dan inteligensi. Kalau kita pintar secara inteligensi, kita tau banyak hal-hal. Tapi kalau kita bijaksana, kita akan dapat menerima kenyataan bahwa ada juga hal-hal yang kita nggak harus ketahui, karena hal-hal tersebut di luar hak kita untuk kita ketahui, dan kita nggak akan pernah bisa mengerti secara penuh anyway (seperti contohnya kebesaran Tuhan).
Bahkan sebagai orang Kristen pun, kita sering menuntut harus tau ini itu. Ada orang-orang yang ke gereja hanya untuk cari kemakmuran, ada pula orang-orang yang ke gereja hanya utk cari kepandaian, apa bedanya?? Tidak ada!
Bersyukurlah kita, kalau kita tidak bisa mengupas dan mengerti Tuhan kita secara 100%, karena itu artinya bijaksana Tuhan kita jauh lebih besar daripada kita.

Seperti jawaban Tuhan kepada penderitaan Ayub, terkadang kita tidak perlu tanya alasan di balik sesuatu, tetapi yang penting adalah apa tujuan di balik semua ini dan apa yang kita bisa lakukan lewat peristiwa ini. Itu pertanyaan yang jauh lebih penting. Dalam kasus Ayub, jawaban Tuhan adalah: Lihatlah binatang-binatang Behemoth dan Leviathan (mythological creatures), mereka sangat liar dan tidak bisa dijinakkan. Sama seperti bagaimana kita tidak bisa menjinakkan Tuhan.
Daripada bertanya "kenapa Tuhan timpakan ini kepada aku?", mungkin kita bisa belajar bertanya,  "apa yang Tuhan mau kerjakan melalui ini?". Instead of melihat ke masa lalu (bertanya kenapa), lihatlah ke masa depan (untuk tujuan apa).

Ketika murid-murid Yesus bertanya kepada Yesus di Yoh 9:1-41, "Rabi, siapakah yang berbuat dosa, orang ini sendiri atau orang tuanya, sehingga ia dilahirkan buta?", "Bukan", jawab Yesus, "tetapi karena pekerjaan-pekerjaan Allah harus dinyatakan di dalam dia."

Memeluk kenyataan bahwa kita tidak bisa dan tidak harus tau segala-galanya juga menandakan adanya trust (kepercayaan) kepada Tuhan. Ini sangat beautiful. Seperti di dalam relasi cinta, jika kita mencintai seseorang, dan kita tau bahwa orang itu juga mencintai kita, akan terdapat trust diantara saudara dan pasangan saudara. Saudara bisa trust, bukan karena saudara telah mengetahui segala-galanya tentang pasangan saudara, tetapi justru karena saudara belum mengetahui semuanya. Dan ini sangat beautiful, karena love is trusting in the absence of knowledge.

2 Mei 2020

Catatan renungan ini belum diperiksa oleh pengkhotbah.

Love in Light of the First Law of Thermodynamics

I often attempt to explain how the disappearance of love's excitement does not imply the love's insincerity. We often accuse love for not being genuine because the spark is no longer there, the butterfly in the stomach gone.

I like to use Newton's First Law of Thermodynamics as a model to explain this phenomenon, which states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed; energy can only be transferred or changed from one form to another.

NOT DESTROYED

Yes, the euphoria of juvenile love diminishes as we mature in relationship. Although we very much enjoy each other's company, we lack the excitement and electric shock we had during out first years.
There is nothing out of the ordinary here; it is as expected. In fact, it could be a sign of growth.

The reason why the first excitement or joy fades away is to give space for a new kind of joy. The new joy does not replace the former joy, but enrich it. You may not feel the butterfly in your stomach anymore, but you have the joy of child-bearing, the joy of raising a child. When the child has grown into an adult, you will yet experience a different joy, that is in watching your children's children grow, and so on and so forth. For who can withstand a constant excitement and euphoria for a prolonged period of time? We would eventually get tired and sick of it ourselves! Like a child who eats too much candy. At first it tastes heavenly, but after days of sucking a lolly, his stomach would start to ache and the last thing he wishes to do is to have another candy.

Love changes from one form to another. When you grow old and grey, you may not possess the spark of youth, for it has been transformed into the strength of mature love, finely tested by time. It is at that moment that you may gaze into your partner's eyes and frames of moments would be projected: the moments when you were there for each other through illness, through adversaries, through disagreements. Yet above all, still you say "I would go through it all over again for you."

NOT CREATED

Back to Newton's First Law of Thermodynamics: "energy can neither be created nor destroyed [...]".
We have talked about the transformation (and not destruction) of love.

But how is love not created?

Man, Pureé and Apple Pie

I find a man oddly comparable to a bowl of rustic vegetable pureé,
or to a sloppily cut slice of a classic apple pie,
what difference is there?

Since harvest, all were collected, selected and piled, observed and judged,
Stripped and peeled and cored and cut,
Salted and drowned we must, with sour, sweet, and rather bitter spice,
Before then thrown into a furnace of flame.

At dinner, people gather round the table,
Hand-in-hand saying grace.
'Grace?'
Man search for grace round the table,
But grave—not grace—was what man found.

For as often as grace dances a hideous waltz,
As it hides under the veil of suffering,
Love shall sing an uneasy tune,
Chained in a chair, forced into a confession.

But alas! See the Man being passed around,
In the dining table that last supper,
To quench the thirst of many,
'He' was grace grief could not stand before.

Ode to a Crescent Moon

what elegance, O Queen of bleak sky,
   though dire wolves await thee bid adieu!
as stars shine bright to glow and die,
   thou still and silent through the night.

bent of mystery, cry of deep misery,
  of a maiden's love--yet to be requited,
what beauty to see, what's hidden from me,
  an enigma dark from mine own sight.

when crescent gone, as dogs howl low,
   a beast of bumps and tainted flesh,
unfolds all secrets now to show
   what it means to be whole again.

Two

Not all who lie
awake at two
In morn's dark veil
are broken souls.
Some ponder deep
of everything
and nothing that
was, is and will to be.

They have been struck
By arrows of
A cupid's bow
that penetrates,
that weaks the strong,
that calms the bold,
that blinds the eye
that now,

Their slumber e'er
forgets its course,
and thoughts sail hard
around the room.
For love rise when
their real life's play
be better than,
their dreams at night.