Paul allowed the Corinthian Christians to eat meat without investigating its origin. Similarly, we use many customs today without concern for their possibly pagan origin.
By Michael Morrison
Paganism, as we know, is a highly controversial subject, but it does need to be discussed. Can we use pagan customs in the Church of God?
We need to recognize that we already do. Simply because something has a pagan origin does not mean that it is sinful to use it, even for a religious use.
* Wedding rings were and are a pagan custom, and there is no biblical command for them, but we use them in church-sanctioned ceremonies.
* Wedding ceremonies themselves were also a pagan custom, and are not commanded in Scripture.
* Funerals include pagan customs, too, based on erroneous ideas about the afterlife. Scripture says nothing about embalming, cremating, caskets or putting flowers on graves.
* Pagans created statues of animals and people, both life-size and miniatures. They had statues in their flower gardens and statues in their homes. These things have lost their "pagan'' connotations because people do not believe in such gods and goddesses anymore.
* Money has pagan designs on it. Some U.S. coins used to have the goddess "Liberty" on them. Dollar bills have an eye over a pyramid.
* Pagans assigned days of the week to different gods, and we still use these names.
So the question arises, How careful must we be in weeding paganism out of our lives? Where do we draw the line? The answer is, different Christians draw the line in different places.
We need to allow some diversity on these issues, especially when we remember our historical tendency to judge people about paisley neckties, medicine, makeup, birthdays and skirt lengths.
Of course, we are not the only ones who made mistakes like that. The Free Methodist church, for example, used to forbid wedding rings, as did many other groups in that tradition. These kinds of concerns were common among conservative Christians.
We want to be careful to do what God says, and if God tells us to avoid paganism, then we carefully do it. So we, and many others, erred on the side of forbidding too much--but we erred.
We made commands about things that God didn't command, and we had to back off when we learned more.
Example of the Corinthians
In the first century church, gentile Christians were told to avoid meat that had been sacrificed to pagan idols (Acts 15:29). However, Paul told the Corinthians that they could eat meat sold in the public market even though that meat had probably been sacrificed to an idol (1 Corinthians 10:25).
And he told them not to eat in the pagan temple. In other words, he told them to avoid blatant paganism, but they did not have to superstitiously avoid everything that paganism might have touched.
In Corinth, some Christians were more careful than others, and some more liberal than others. Paul told them they could eat the meat, but he also told them to be cautious about causing offense. However, love does not mean that we all have to abide by the strictest person's conscience (verses 32-33).
Now let us imagine a first century potluck in the Corinthian church. Everyone has brought food and everyone has eaten a little bit of everything. Suddenly some overly zealous convert, anxious to avoid the paganism he recently came out of, starts asking questions about the meat.
The Smiths, he finds out, bought their beef from John Pagan, and John always has his cows killed at the temple of Zeus. The casserole has been tainted with pagan-tainted meat, and everybody has eaten some of it!
What should the zealous convert do with this information? Should he announce it throughout the congregation, leading to an ever more diligent search for pagan-tainted foods? Of course not. The sensible (and the Christian) thing to do would be to keep quiet--but we know that overly zealous converts sometimes aren't sensible.
Their zeal overcomes good sense, and although they think they are acting in love, they are actually causing an unnecessary and unhelpful disturbance with their "knowledge.'' That's what happens today when people preach that wedding rings are pagan.
It is possible to be too zealous in avoiding things that have connections with paganism. Yelling about idol-tainted meat doesn't do anything to strengthen anyone's faith in Christ. All it would do is cause doubts and irritations. That is basically what we did in our vociferous condemnations of Christmas.
People today generally learn about Christmas as a Christian custom, not as a pagan custom. It's like they saw the meat in the market and there was a sign saying "OK for Christians." So they bought it, and then we came along and told them it was tainted.
Some people don't think that the example of meat can apply to holidays; some people do. So, they draw their lines in different places.
Each person considers himself or herself as strong and others as weak, but how are the weak and the strong to get along with each other? Not by enforcing conformity, but by allowing some diversity.
Some people have claimed that Jesus was born near the fall festivals. That is possible, but it is not proven. It is not likely that Augustus would risk a rebellion by requiring each person to go to his own city at the same time as the local religion required everyone to go to Jerusalem.
Many people have objected to the idea that Jesus was born in December, since there were shepherds in their fields (Luke 2:8), and shepherds didn't normally do that in December. But we must remember that this was not a normal year.
Augustus had told everyone to go to his or her own city (verse 3), but the shepherds had not--they were living in the fields! They may have been tax evaders. They had reason to stay away from town as long as they could. Of course, this doesn't prove that Jesus was born in December, but it does show that the chief objection to a December birth isn't necessarily conclusive.
In the year 221 (long before the time of Constantine), Julius Africanus came up with Dec. 25 as the date of Jesus' birth. He doesn't tell us how he came up with this date, but a later author calculates the date in this way: Zechariah was serving in the temple during the fall festivals when Gabriel told him that his wife would conceive (Luke 1:8, 23). Jesus was conceived six months later (verse 26), near the spring equinox. Jesus would therefore be born in late December.
Of course, this calculation is not proof (the starting assumptions are not proven) but it shows that the date was not necessarily based on paganism. The date could have been calculated without any reference to pagan customs.
Julius' calculation may have been innocent, or it may have been contrived. We do not know what his motive was. Therefore, we cannot dogmatically say that the Dec. 25 date was contrived simply because a pagan festival already existed on that date. We weren't there, so we cannot claim to know that it was a deliberate attempt to get Christians to observe a pagan day.
When the church first began celebrating Christmas, it had nothing to do with trees and holly and reindeer. All those were added centuries later in northern Europe. The fact that non-Christian customs were later associated with the festival does not prove that the date itself originated in paganism.
However, for the moment let us suppose that Christmas originated as a deliberate substitution for Saturnalia. Many of the people who attended church were recently converted pagans. Some were not-yet-converted pagans.
They were attracted to the Saturnalia festivities, and sitting at home alone was not a desirable option when merrymaking could be heard in the streets all around. So, the theory goes, the church provided a clean alternative: going to church.
Would it be wrong to have a church service in deliberate opposition to Saturnalia?
There is no question of the church trying to worship God by the customs of the heathen--the church is fighting against the customs of the heathen. Only the date is the same, and there is good reason to have church services on that date, on which members can invite their unconverted friends and family into church and away from paganism.
At some point, Christians made the comparison: On this date, pagans celebrate the birth of the sun god, but we are worshiping the sun of righteousness (Malachi 4:2). We can celebrate his birth, too.
That may have been the way Christmas started. Apparently in the early centuries it was primarily a church service. And the strategy seems to have been successful: No one celebrates Saturnalia any more. Christians don't observe Christmas in honor of the sun god, just as Christians don't worship the figurines or statues that they have in their homes. Although the day was once used for idol worship, it isn't anymore.
Consider the case of Christians in Korea, for example. Dec. 25 was not a pagan holiday there. And yet Christians there now observe Dec. 25. Why? Because missionaries introduced the holiday.
For them, it has a Christian origin, not a pagan one. Should the scrupulous Christians go in to tell them that Dec. 25 was once sacrificed to an idol and should therefore be avoided? That approach creates doubts, not dedication. It does not edify or encourage. But this was sometimes our approach.
Two scriptures have often been used to argue against Christmas customs. The most recent edition of our Christmas booklet explains that Jeremiah 10 has nothing to do with Christmas trees.
That custom originated in northern Europe and had nothing to do with Jeremiah centuries earlier. The Nov. 14 WN also explains this, and it has a box explaining Deuteronomy 12:30.
The summary is that God does not object to all worship practices of the pagans (such as prayer, sacrifices and temples), but only the abominations that they did in worship. Basically, if it's wrong, it's wrong on any day of the year. That's the kind of customs we need to beware of.
But if a custom is harmless in July (decorating the house with colored lights, for example), then we needn't condemn it in December. We can't let centuries-dead pagans dictate what we can or can't do.
So we have to narrow things down: If Christmas is a sin, just where is the sin? Is it a sin for the church to have worship services on this date? Is it a sin to celebrate the birth of the "Sun of Righteousness" (Malachi 4:2)? Is it a sin to celebrate his birth on this particular date? Is it a sin to celebrate this date to the exclusion of others?
Eastern Orthodox Christians, for example, may observe Jan. 6 as a festival for the birth of Christ. They were not influenced by Rome or Saturnalia. Is it OK to observe this date, or do we feel a compulsion to dig into history looking for something bad about this day so we can disqualify it? Do we feel a compulsion to ask whether the meat has been sacrificed to an idol?
Let's summarize:
1) It is not wrong to rejoice at the birth of Jesus.
2) It is not wrong to do this every year.
3) It is not wrong to add a religious festival.
4) The date of Dec. 25 isn't necessarily pagan.
5) Even if the date is pagan, it isn't automatically wrong to use things that used to be pagan, such as wedding rings, funeral customs, statues and the names of days.
If the date is permissible and church services are permissible, but certain customs are not, then we ought to specify which customs are ungodly rather than just condemning everything associated with the date.
If a fat man in a red suit is permissible, but fables about him are not, then we need to identify the sin without condemning the harmless. Of course, different Christians will draw the lines in different places, and we need to get along with each other.
Paganism is an emotion-laden subject. We have a history of being dogmatic, legalistic and of misusing the Scriptures when we argue our point. With that history, of course, it is impossible to discuss this subject without somebody disagreeing. Each person thinks himself to be properly balanced--but each person's balance point is different. Equally sincere people draw lines in different places. What then are we to do?
Should the church legislate about which practices are OK and which are not? That is not our commission. We are not in the Talmud business. Each Christian should draw his or her own lines, and be tolerant of those who draw different lines. Do not judge your brother, Paul says (Romans 14:5-13). That is one of the most difficult commandments in the entire Bible!
We do not want members to be offended. Those who participate should be cautious; those who see others participating should be tolerant. No one has to participate. But we should not condemn those who do--including people in our own fellowship who choose to do certain things on Dec. 24 or 25.
Just as in the matter of makeup and birthdays, some will do it one way and some will do it another. Whether you participate or whether you abstain, do it all to the Lord, and let him be the judge. This is the Christian approach to the cultural situation today.
[ Worldwide Church of God | Worldwide News | December 5, 1995 ]
Copyright © Worldwide Church of God, 1995