|
Post by torainfor on Mar 13, 2008 15:23:14 GMT -5
My friend's elderly mother died just days before Christmas. When she told me, I immediately got this picture of her walking into a great house, decorated to the teeth for Christmas. But instead of a regular Christmas, it was a celebration of Jesus' birthday. All the presents under the tree were for Him. The gifts were just a reflection of the guests' talents--painting, singing, a bouquet of flowers...a newly fixed motorcycle, whatever.
I never developed it--I'm leery of fictionalizing Jesus. But it brought my friend comfort during her first Christmas without her mom.
|
|
|
Post by kouter on Mar 13, 2008 17:29:14 GMT -5
Fictionalizing Jesus is always an awkward thing to attempt. However when it comes to Christmas perhaps there is more you should know about it. Christmas actually has very little to do with true Christianity. If any of you do celebrte Christmas please read this article. www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Psychology/xmas/celeb.htmThis view might not be popular depending on your background but approach it with an open heart and above all be prayerful and study the word of God for His answer.
|
|
|
Post by Divides the Waters on Mar 13, 2008 23:01:32 GMT -5
Colossians 2:16,17
Randy Alcorn does a pretty good job of putting heaven into fictional terms in DEADLINE and DOMINION. I could see your story going along those lines.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff Gerke on Mar 14, 2008 7:27:47 GMT -5
I like your idea, torainfor. It's a cool perspective.
And welcome to The Anomaly!
Jeff
|
|
|
Post by strangewind on Mar 14, 2008 11:18:32 GMT -5
I don't want to derail the discussion because I really like what torainfor has to say, and I think honest attempts to fictionalize Jesus are a good thing, and brave. It might not work in the end, but I don't think there's anything wrong with taking a good stab at it.
I did want to address something that kouter mentions. I've heard this argument against Christmas often, which basically boils down to "the pagans invented Christmas, and only later was it "Christianized."
I actually believe that that is a worldly argument. After all, which came first, Christ or pagans?
Christ, of course. He's mentioned as early as Genesis 1, at the very beginning of history. Later histories (particularly John's account) identify him as co-eternal with the father.
In other words, all pagan worship, all idolatry, all other religions come after the promise of a coming and risen Messiah.
In my opinion, Christmas is less a "borrowing from" than a "taking back."
Pagan festivals are not, in and of themselves, generated by man's evil desires, but are, in fact, corruptions of a great good: the festival we are to share with our Maker, by his design.
It is in light of this knowledge that my conscience tells me that a faithful "fictionalization" of Jesus is not only permissible, but may be the very thing that drives a non-believer to the foot of the cross.
After all, I was first introduced to George Washington by the fictional account of the cherry tree. I was first introduced to the study of history through the fictional accounts of Middle Earth and Horatio Hornblower. I was first introduced to the idea of a living, breathing St. John through the fictional stage production of St. John in Exile, starring Dean Jones. So, Christ is certainly a worthy subject for fiction.
I really like this story idea.
|
|
|
Post by kouter on Mar 14, 2008 17:02:15 GMT -5
eh... I'm not too sure about that logic there Strange. Just be sure you're not justifying self, instead of being justified by the Word of God.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff Gerke on Mar 15, 2008 7:29:28 GMT -5
I see the validity of both arguments. However, while strangewind makes a good point, there's no denying that at least in terms of human history several of the dates of our major Christian holidays had previously been the dates of pagan festivals.
I think of All Hallows' Day (and All Hallows' Eve) as an effort to "take back" Samhaim. I forget the names of the pagan holidays that were previously on the dates when we now celebrate Christmas and Easter, but I suspect they may've had to do with solstices.
Think of the situation the ancient and medieval church was facing. They saw themselves as the correct and only real or valid religion (a view I share today, though it's decidedly not PC) and yet the society at large held pagan holidays. Indeed, much of the "fun" and meaningfulness of those cultures revolved around these celebrations, which always diverted people back to non-Christian deities.
What's a church to do? Well, since they were in power and had the civil government behind them, they simply captured those holidays. They threw a gigantic Christian rug over them and said, "Un uh, it's not the day when the spirits of dead people walk the earth; it's the day we celebrate departed saints."
While they may've used strong-arm tactics and while their efforts were certainly not appreciated by the populace for many centuries, you can't argue with their impulse. They were not trying to stop people from celebrating--they knew they couldn't do that--but they were instead attempting to harness those celebratory energies and point them toward the things of Christ.
Jeff
|
|
|
Post by kouter on Mar 15, 2008 8:39:22 GMT -5
Well stated Jeff. I believe the issue now is this: now that Christianity has conquered those pagan ideals do we still need to keep the rug over them?
Food for thought indeed.
|
|
|
Post by torainfor on Mar 15, 2008 17:50:03 GMT -5
When it comes to celebrating Christmas, I'm actually more concerned about the great American pagan custom of commercialism. With an entire family's worth of expectations bearing down on me every year, I have yet to figure that one out.
|
|
|
Post by strangewind on Mar 17, 2008 16:55:37 GMT -5
To clarify my point: does paganism exist in a vacuum? To put it another way, is there nothing good in pagan festivals? If there is anything good in them, then that good has its source in God. If there is, in fact, nothing good in them, then why are they fun?
This isn't about self, and is about the Word. Why does Paul acknowledge the "Unknown God?" Why didn't he just tell the worshippers that they were embroiled in Pagan idolatry and better get with the program?
Even taking the view that the later Jewish (and then Christian) practices are in response to pagan worship, why does God command certain festivals be held? Was he not worried that they might appear to simply be derivations of pre-existing pagan worship?
Don't misunderstand me: I'm not pretending that Christmas, as currently celebrated, doesn't have pagan contributions. But I balk at the idea of pagan "origins" for any act of worship. Basically, the entire idea of pagan worship (which is, at base, worship of the self) is a copy, a bad copy, of the pure and genuine worship of God that occurred in the Garden and was restored on the cross.
...whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, let your mind dwell on these things --- I would be remiss to mention this when I talk of these things. Christmas and Easter are the most powerful cultural opportunities for me to share the love of the Master with those who still tremble in darkness. Getting caught up in whether or not the log that I burn on December 25 is a yule-type or just regular is one that I've got no time for, but I do think that if something is noble, which the long-standing message of Christmas charity is, the last thing we Christians ought to be doing is abdicating it to a pagan world.
|
|
|
Post by strangewind on Mar 17, 2008 17:06:01 GMT -5
I'll add one thing more: when I was a hardcore atheist, Christmas and Easter were religious observances that I despised, because, for all the sham trappings and goofy pagan window dressing, I couldn't escape Him. Jesus enters the cultural discussions for at least a month for Christmas and a week or so during Easter. Even my unbelieving self realized that you couldn't have those two major holidays without a pretty deep recognition of the biblical account of Jesus' life.
And I hated it. I would have wanted nothing other than for Christ to have been forcibly and irrevocably removed from any mention of Christmas, so I could go off and have my shallow fun. Easter could have been blotted off the map for all I cared. Sure, I was well aware of the now popular "pagan origins" of Christian holidays, and would use them to discredit Christianity if I could, but, deep down, I was in a losing argument with myself, and I couldn't shake it.
What other time during the year would a secular cartoon be run every year that tells the Lukan account of Christ's birth? What other time during the year would the whole world be abuzz about the second coming?
There is so much good (in the Christian sense of good) about Christmas and Easter that I think that, although one's personal faith may not be bothered by the elimination of those holidays, I do think that we'd lose two very important cultural opportunities to share the Gospel.
I'll keep 'em, thanks.
|
|
|
Post by torainfor on Mar 17, 2008 18:48:10 GMT -5
There is that. Since we got the kid, I've seen the similarity between the non-Biblical hoopla we tag onto Christmas and Easter and the memorial of stones God had the Children of Israel set up when they crossed the Jordan (Josh 4).
6b "In the future, when your children ask you, 'What do these stones mean?' 7 tell them that the flow of the Jordan was cut off before the ark of the covenant of the LORD. When it crossed the Jordan, the waters of the Jordan were cut off. These stones are to be a memorial to the people of Israel forever."
Now it's my job to translate for my kid. To transfer the measure of celebration and joy presently expressed in terms he can understand (tree, presents, etc.) to the Biblical--Christ's birth, death, and resurrection.
|
|
|
Post by strangewind on Mar 18, 2008 8:53:11 GMT -5
That's an excellent point, and I think that's why I really like your idea of developing a story about Christmas in heaven. I think it would fundamentally speak to people who wouldn't normally pick up a Christian story, but since its got the familiar tone of Christmas as a hook, that it really might. For example, there are tons of non-Christians who have no problem with (even enjoy) the transformation of Scrooge in A Christmas Carol. I think well-told stories provide access to people who otherwise would not be open to God's call.
|
|
|
Post by rwley on Mar 18, 2008 9:02:52 GMT -5
Great example of this: Tolkien to Lewis. It was Tolkien's argument of the true-myth concept that helped Lewis really begin to see God and understand his need for a Saviour. Well told stories, indeed.
|
|
|
Post by Divides the Waters on Mar 18, 2008 21:59:33 GMT -5
I just saw a pretty good documentary on St. Patrick. It showed how he used the pagan culture of Ireland to his benefit, giving new meaning to old symbols, etc. It was really pretty amazing.
|
|