Questions for Gentiles Who Practice Jewish Holidays

[Laurie4b]

This makes sense. I have to say that -- as a Jewish person -- I find it a little baffling that Christians find meaning in contemporary Jewish practices, and there's something of an Alice-in-Wonderland aspect to seeing your own traditions and teachings interpreted through a wildly different lens, but you make a valuable point that appropriation and reinterpretation of others' rituals -- regardless of how much it bothers the appropriatees -- is the history of religion.

 

Just out of curiosity -- and I absolutely mean this as an honest question, not a snippy one at all -- what is the Christian take on their own practices being reinterpreted by others? For example, what if Jews started celebrating Communion as how it relates to biblical-era Shabbat rites, taking Jesus out of it entirely? Or if Muslims reinterpreted the Eucharist as being about Mohammad and incorporated that into their own religious practices? Would this kind of thing be perceived as a problem, or does the evangelical aspect of Christianity perhaps contribute to a more relaxed attitude?

 

nt

[brehon]

Ester Maria,

 

Thank you for the explanation. So, an analogous situation would be the Catholic and Orthodox belief in both Scripture and Tradition (i.e., the writings of the early Church fathers, etc)? Hmmm...I'm sure that's not a perfect analogy, either. Anyway, I appreciate you taking the time to answer. Thanks.

 

Oh, you say the oral Talmud is/was passed down to each generation. If you don't mind what is probably a very basic (and idiotic question) - was a certain tribe (or group of people within the tribe) responsible for this? Wasn't one of the twelve tribes the priestly tribe? Or was this passed down among all the people? [again, i've probably completely bungled the question. apologies and thanks for your forebearance.]

[Melinda in VT]

Just so you know....many, many Christians find "Xmas" for "Christmas" very offensive. I must say that I have never in my life seen *Xtian*!!!! I realize that you don't believe that Jesus is the Messiah, so you wouldn't want to call Him "Christ" yourself; but, Christmas, Christian, and Christianity refer to a holiday, a follower of Jesus, and the religion of those who believe in Jesus.

 

I don't believe that The Buddha is the Enlightened One, but I would never refer to him as the XOne, or The X.

 

Using X to stand for Christ is a very old practice, going back to the Greek letter Chi. Xmas and Xtian are not new usages and did not originate as insults.

 

Eliana hasn't posted much recently, but she's been on the board for years and her gentleness and kindness always impress me.

[HRAAB]

Just so you know....many, many Christians find "Xmas" for "Christmas" very offensive. I must say that I have never in my life seen *Xtian*!!!! I realize that you don't believe that Jesus is the Messiah, so you wouldn't want to call Him "Christ" yourself; but, Christmas, Christian, and Christianity refer to a holiday, a follower of Jesus, and the religion of those who believe in Jesus.

 

I don't believe that The Buddha is the Enlightened One, but I would never refer to him as the XOne, or The X.

 

I think it might be a good idea to research the reason behind someone writing Xtain instead of Christian before accusing them of being offensive. X stands for the Greek letter Chi which is the first letter in Christos. There is absolutely no offense intended nor is it done to intentionally 'X' out Christ. Of course you wouldn't refer to Buddha as the 'XOne' because it wouldn't make any sense. Xtian does make sense.

[milovany]

.

Edited December 7, 2010 by milovaný
Repetetive post

[milovany]

Ester Maria,

 

Thank you for the explanation. So, an analogous situation would be the Catholic and Orthodox belief in both Scripture and Tradition (i.e., the writings of the early Church fathers, etc)? Hmmm...I'm sure that's not a perfect analogy, either. Anyway, I appreciate you taking the time to answer. Thanks.

 

I was thinking this, too, the other day in relation to this or another similar thread. For the Orthodox, Scripture is a part of Holy Tradition -- the prayers, the liturgy, the lives of the saints, the teachings of the church fathers, the sacraments, etc (ie, the way the Church lives; the Holy Spirit in the Church) make up what is called Holy Tradition. The Scriptures are interpreted through this Holy Tradition. Is this what it's like for the Jewish faith and written/oral teachings and traditions? I thought it was a good analogy but would be interested in hearing from someone who is Jewish about it.

[Rosie_0801]

Very similar issues arise with some Pagans/New Age practitioners and Native American religious traditions, by the way. People with no connections to a Native American community think some of their religious practices are cool and want to adopt them, often without much consideration of whether doing so is desired by, or respectful of, people whom they believe they are honoring.

 

I wouldn't think any of this would be a problem if people did what they feel they need to do quietly in their own homes. Would that be stomping over anyone or their traditions? Or would it be being inspired to a new way of feeling a closer relationship to God by accessing wisdom from an earlier tradition? Is the problem what people are doing, or that they are being inappropriately public about it?

 

 

Rosie- who clearly goes in for DIY religion and probably doesn't have the right mindset for approaching these sorts of conversations.

[brehon]

I'm not sure I understand the question... but I'll try to give a brief, and necessarily over simplified, summary of my worldview:

 

The Torah was given in two parts: Torah SheBichtav (The Written Torah) and Torah SheBaalPeh (The Oral Torah).

 

The Oral Torah had two primary components: principles of exegesis and actual Laws.

 

The Oral Torah was memorized and transmitted from generation to generation, including some of the interpretations/expansions based on the principles of exegesis.

 

At a time of great turmoil and challenge, Yehuda HaNasi gathered a bare bones written complitation of Oral Law - the Mishna.

 

The Mishna has six sedarim ('orders') each broken into mashechtos ('tractates') and conveys the principles and laws by presenting specific cases and some discussion of them.

 

After a few more centuries of dispersion and persecution and even more turmoil, it was decided that even more should be committed to writing. The Gemara (also called the Talmud) was redacted - it goes through the Mishnah and has Rabbinic discussions, expansions, and digressions. [The standard text is the Talmud Bavli (the Babylonian Talmud) - the Talmud Yerushalmi had been begun before, but was never completed.]

 

Midrash - I'm not sure how to succinctly summarize it... Midrashim learn out from Torah... in an aggadic way... with allegories, with stories - many clearly not literal. There are a number of traditional collections & mirdrashim are referred to in many commentaries.

 

None of these are, in any way I can see, parallel to Catholic oral traditions - since they were either given at Har Sinai, or derive from principles given there.

 

What would be more analagous, is our ongoing body of halachic (Jewish Law) works, and halachic responsa. Or, perhaps, the layers of commentators on the Torah - Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Ramban, etc, etc.

 

I'm not sure I've answered your question at all - I'm sorry!

 

Eliana,

 

Thank you for a wonderful explanation. I've always thoroughly enjoyed your posts. As to the bolded - yes, I can see that. The difference being the Torah was received by Moses (both the oral and written traditions) on Mt Sinai versus the early Church fathers commenting on/interpreting Scripture, but not receiving it from God. Would you say that is a fair comparison? Catholics and Orthodox believe in Holy Tradition which encompasses Scripture, prayers, liturgy, writings of the early Church fathers, etc. It seems the better analogy then is the halachic works/responsa and the writers/commentators of the early Church.

 

I'm at work right now and am supposed to be updating my system's strategic plan and between that and running calls my brain is short circuiting. I'm sure my questions are not clear; so, thank you for your forebearance and patience.

[shinyhappypeople]

I am confused by this.

 

As I understood Xtianity, you are not obligated, by the customs of your faith, to any of the halachos (Laws) - your position, as I understand it, is that your messiah made all of them unnecessary. That doesn't seem compatible with saying that he established them.

 

I also do not see how using Jewish traditions would help you find a Xtian messiah in these holidays - the Xtian idea of messiah is incompatible with the Jewish one... and the Xtian ideas of 'salvation' have no connection to Jewish theology. As Ester Maria said, we have fundamentally different frameworks - I do not see how you can use the trappings of our framework to give you any insight into your own.

 

...nor do I understand why a Xtian, who denies the applicability of both Torah commandments and Rabbinic Law, would find meaning in 'observing' our obligations.

 

I would think it would be more meaningful to look at your own faith, your own traditions, your own heritage for deepening your religious faith and observance.

 

I don't want to sound (or to be!) unsympathetic, or, G-d forbid, unkind - and I understand that your intentions are non-hostile. :) ...but I suggest, respectfully, that you reconsider how you might best meets your goals.

 

I wish you all the best on your spiritual journey and hope you find the tools you need for the next stage! :grouphug:

 

My mother is a Christian who attends a Messianic congregation and incorporates Jewish traditions into her daily life. I attend a normal protestant church with normal protestant beliefs (well, for the most part).

 

Here's how it was explained to me (the very short version): "Jesus was a Jew. We want to live as Jesus lived, and part of that is celebrating the Jewish traditions because Jesus celebrated them. Living as Jesus did is a way to honor him." I know there's a lot more to it than that, but that's the quickie version. :001_smile:

 

This certainly doesn't speak to *every* Christian who maintains Jewish traditions as a part of her faith, but it's one point of view. I disagree with it, personally, but to each her own.

 

Please understand that their intention is not to harm or offend at all.

 

I do think it's inappropriate for Christians to celebrate Hanukkah, though. it wasn't established until after the time of Christ. So, what relevance does it have to Christian faith? However, despite this, last night my DH, kids and I were at mom's house for (sigh) Hanukkah. It's meaningful to my mom and so, as a sign of respect for her, I go... but... it just feels so empty to me. I have no connection to it at all.

[brehon]

:grouphug: Likewise, my dear!

 

You're too kind! *pauses for a moment to enjoy a moment of mutual admiration*

 

I think we each have a system which... builds on what has come before, and has a framework in place for how exegesis is to be done, and how rulings are to be arrived at. ..which is probably why Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy make much more intuitive sense to me than the Protestant movements - I get so bewildered sometimes!

 

Yes, I understand this. I too get bewildered at times trying to tease out how some denominations/movements (certainly not all) arrive at their individual doctrines/rulings/beliefs.

 

 

...and I'm running on several weeks of way too little sleep, with a house full of sick kids and a teething, but inexhaustible little one. It is one of the little ironies of my universe that I only seem to post when I am having trouble stringing words together into sentences... and when I am interrupted between each sentence - if not more often.

 

So sorry to hear your crew isn't feeling well. Hopefully, this illness runs its course quickly. I too am running on little sleep between 911 calls at all hours of the night (while on duty - and, yes, it's what I'm paid to do. My dirty little work secret is that my pay is not dependant on patient contact; I'm perfectly happy to sit in the station and do...nothing) and, on my days off, my little one who wants to nurse every 2 hours, especially at night. I've almost given up trying to post during the day when I'm off duty as I feel I come across as a blithering idiot because I'm interrupted so much.:tongue_smilie:

 

So thank *you* for your patience!

 

:grouphug:

[ELaurie]

I'll refrain from posting in this thread, other than to say it's lovely to have you back on the boards with us - you've been missed :grouphug:

[milovany]

My mother is a Christian who attends a Messianic congregation and incorporates Jewish traditions into her daily life...Here's how it was explained to me (the very short version): "Jesus was a Jew. We want to live as Jesus lived, and part of that is celebrating the Jewish traditions because Jesus celebrated them. Living as Jesus did is a way to honor him."

 

See, with this I think the thing is that YES, the Lord Jesus Christ was a Jewish man, and lived by those laws, etc. before He died and was resurrected, because this had to be so for the prophecies to be fulfilled and for Him to be obedient to that tradition, but if He were STILL living on the earth (i.e., didn't ascend to heaven), He'd be a part of what He came to establish on the earth through His death and resurrection, which is His body, the Church; he wouldn't still be living as a Jewish man (a faith that denies His being the Messiah).

 

You can read the early church fathers, including writings from men who knew an apostle personally and from men who lived in the first and second centuries, and see that a completely new thing developed, which was the "one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church." There was no "Messianic Jew" movement, there were no denominations -- the church was one. The Holy Spirit, which directed this Church, developed brand new traditions, feasts, sacraments, etc. Some were/are reminiscent of the Jewish practices (incense, vestments, an annual cycle of feasts, a hierarchal structure, candles, etc.), of course, because the same Holy God was in charge, but it really was and is a new thing; it's not Christianized Judaism. So, as Christians, wouldn't we want to be part of what actually did develop (the new feasts/sacraments/etc.)? Not flying by the seat of our pants with our own interpretations and opinions and innovations 2000 years after the fact?

 

Please know the above was written not to argue and especially not to offend, but solely to address this idea that because Jesus lived as a Jew, we -- as Christians -- can/should too (which I know you weren't presenting as YOUR idea, but your mom's).

Edited December 7, 2010 by milovaný

[missiemick]

Wow -- we keep the Biblical Feasts and Festivals. We keep the Feasts, Festivals . . . out of respect and love for the Lord and I've found my love for Him has grown over the years. I had no idea how offensive our faith and practices were to so many people until I read this thread -- so sad . . .

[milovany]

Wow -- we keep the Biblical Feasts and Festivals. We keep the Feasts, Festivals . . . out of respect and love for the Lord and I've found my love for Him has grown over the years. I had no idea how offensive our faith and practices were to so many people until I read this thread -- so sad . . .

 

:grouphug:

 

I think the question remains: As a Christian, why not celebrate the feasts of the Church? Why celebrate the feasts of that which came before the Church, its prefiguring? The Church is Christ's body and the fulfillment of what came before -- and it has a wonderful cycle of feasts and fasts of its own (ones that celebrate Christ being in our midst now that He's died and been resurrected, not ones that merely point to Him in a symbolic way). Please know I'm not saying this in an argumentative way -- I'm truly curious as to why people would choose the Jewish feasts over the feasts of the Church. Unless one doesn't even know they exist? (Which was the case for us a couple of years ago, so I can sympathize with this being the reason. We had never before thought to take a look at church history, and to see what actually did happen in the earlier centuries of Christianity).

Edited December 7, 2010 by milovaný

[Leola]

.

Edited December 10, 2010 by Leola

[shinyhappypeople]

Not going to repeat what's already been said. But I have to add. Sigh!

 

As a Christian, I am incredibly frustrated by Christians who are offended by this because it's wrong. This is not something to be offended by. This is nonsense someone (who didn't know better!) made up and many Christians have jumped on this bandwagon. It's not removing Christ - it is still Christ.

 

Xtian is actually more correct because the word Christ comes from Greek!

 

And Christ isn't even His name. It's more His title. It means anointed one or Messiah. It's like saying Jesus the Messiah. There is nothing wrong with calling him Christ. And there is nothing wrong with saying Xmas. They are the same!

 

Replacing it with the greek letter Chi (X) shouldn't be something Christians are offended by. Because this is in no way offensive - actually it's very respectful.

 

Please spread the word to your Xtian friends this Xmas that there is nothing wrong with this!

 

It may be correct but, at least in my neck in the woods, in the past it has been widely used with the intention of insulting or discounting Christian faith. So, it does put me off, if I'm being honest. I try to shrug it off, and rarely, if ever, mention anything, but there ya' go. I definitely experience a negative gut reaction.

 

I think it's useful to point out (kindly) that using "xian" or "xmas" might be construed as offensive so people can avoid causing unintentional hurt feelings. I'm thinking most people would happily type a few extra letters rather than cause unnecessary offense.

[Leola]

.

Edited December 10, 2010 by Leola

[HRAAB]

:grouphug:

 

I think the question remains: As a Christian, why not celebrate the feasts of the Church? Why celebrate the feasts of that which came before the Church, its prefiguring? The Church is Christ's body and the fulfillment of what came before -- and it has a wonderful cycle of feasts and fasts of its own (ones that celebrate Christ being in our midst now that He's died and been resurrected, not ones that merely point to Him in a symbolic way). Please know I'm not saying this in an argumentative way -- I'm truly curious as to why people would choose the Jewish feasts over the feasts of the Church. Unless one doesn't even know they exist? (Which was the case for us a couple of years ago, so I can sympathize with this being the reason. We had never before thought to take a look at church history, and to see what actually did happen in the earlier centuries of Christianity).

 

Our faith is so rich and full of beautiful traditions and feasts. When I sit down to plan out our liturgical year's celebrations, my calendar is full; I'm not sure where I would fit in new feasts. I have friends that celebrate Jewish feasts, and while I know their intentions are absolutely good - wanting to grow closer to Jesus - I still scratch my head over it.

[JennyD]

From upthread, Ester Maria, what a great quote. The perfect analogy.

 

FWIW, until this very moment I was under the misapprehension that substituting "X" for "Christ" was actually a Christian thing. (Indeed, I was more than a little confused when I got to Eliana's post.) I assumed that it was a way to avoid writing the name itself, a la the Jewish practice. An excellent example of the distortive lenses of seeing everything through one's own traditions!

[Guest Just Jen]

Here goes. My first post.

 

 

I think the question remains: As a Christian, why not celebrate the feasts of the Church?

 

Because some of the supposed Christian Church Feasts are based on pagan days of worship. Others have been instituted by man and are not found in the Bible. Personally, I do not believe that these honour the Lord. Taking pagan traditions and giving them a Christian twist is against His teaching. Christianity is supposed to be about the teachings of Christ, isn't it? Not the teachings of man. Please show me where the adherence to the festivals/fasts of Lent, Advent, Christmas or Easter are taught in the Bible.

 

Why celebrate the feasts of that which came before the Church, its prefiguring?

 

The Feasts which came before are "shadows of things to come" and they were given by God to His people to be practised forever. ("Throughout your generations" I'm pretty sure means forever.) What does forever mean to you? I have heard it said that God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. If this is true and that is how He wanted to be worshipped then, why would it be different now?

 

The Church is Christ's body and the fulfillment of what came before -- and it has a wonderful cycle of feasts and fasts of its own (ones that celebrate Christ being in our midst now that He's died and been resurrected, not ones that merely point to Him in a symbolic way).

 

These "old" feasts were God's way of showing His people what was to come, training if you like, and they are still very relevant today considering they have not yet all been fulfilled. Passover, Unleavened Bread, First Fruits and Pentecost have been fulfilled in the death, burial and ascension of Jesus and the coming of the Holy Spirit. Trumpets, Atonement and Tabernacles have not yet been fulfilled and are therefore current. Not in the past as suggested. Praise the Lord that we have such a wonderful picture of His plan.

Please know I'm not saying this in an argumentative way -- I'm truly curious as to why people would choose the Jewish feasts over the feasts of the Church.

 

I choose the Feasts of the Lord (in the Bible they are never refereed to as Jewish Feasts) because I am trying to follow as closely as possible the ways of the Body after Christ's death, not what it looked like after Roman interference. Christianity comes from Jewish roots and all of the early teachers were observant Jews, just as Jesus was. I am truly curious as to why modern Christians ignore this fact? We are not a totally new religion. We are a new branch of an older one. The New Testament is not a new Bible. It is the extension of an older one.

 

Unless one doesn't even know they exist? (Which was the case for us a couple of years ago, so I can sympathize with this being the reason. We had never before thought to take a look at church history, and to see what actually did happen in the earlier centuries of Christianity).

 

Indeed there is so much to see when you look at history. Such as the argument about Passover and Easter.

 

"Acceptance of Easter over Passover did not come without resistance. Two religious leaders of the mid-second century—Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna in Asia Minor, and Anicetus, bishop of Rome—debated this very point. Anicetus argued for Easter while Polycarp, a student of the apostle John, defended observing “the Christian Passover, on the 14th of Nisan, the first month of the Jewish ecclesiastical calendar, regardless of the day of the week†(Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th edition, Micropaedia, Vol. 8, p. 94, “Polycarpâ€).

 

Interesting that a student of one of the Apostles was arguing for Passover, don't you think? Passover was what the early followers were practising but it was replaced by the Roman pagan feast of Easter by the decision of man.

 

 

 

I am sincerely sorry to offend anyone but I know this is inevitable because of the nature of man.

 

I read in one post that people should be sensitive about celebrating the Feasts of the Lord so as not to offend any Jewish people. How can any Christian avoid offending a Jewish person? The mere claim that we are followers of Christ is offensive to them when they don't believe that He has come yet. Does this mean that I will stop calling myself a Christian so as not to hurt their feelings? No. It grieves my heart and I am sorry to offend my big brother Israel because I love him but I will not renounce my heritage in Christ or the treasures He has given to me in His Word.

 

The Bible was written by Jews. When I read it, I try very hard to read it as one. Understanding Judaism will help you understand the Bible all the more. Imagine my surprise when I realised that a Jewish day goes from sundown to sundown. That sure put some things in a different light. (You all probably know this but I am an ex-pagan who is new to Christianity, loving the very thing that I loathed before.)

 

I hope my perspective has been helpful.

[milovany]

Bless you and may you know God in His fullness! We believed the way you described about two to three years ago (or were starting to more and more). But the more we studied what really actually happened in the early church -- as opposed to what the general Christian population in American thinks happened based on their own interpretations of the Scriptures and history from this vantage point 2000 years later -- the more we realized that the God was in the development of the early Church by the power of the Holy Spirit and that it is the fulfillment of those OT prefigurings. I don't expect you to agree, I'm just stating part of our process. I'm thankful you love God, and may you know Him better and better on your journey!

[SonshineLearner]

And, I just have to say.... these are yummy!!!! And... "Hamen" rhymes with "Ramen" :) I think it'd be fun to go and shake the cans.... and hear this story in a Temple!! ;)

 

 

Here's a recipe (I've tried a bunch, and this is the best!):

Hamentaschen (Hamen's Pockets)

 

Bake at 350F for 15 minutes. Makes about 2 dozen. Recipe can be doubled.

 

The Dough

 

• 3/4 cup of sugar

• 3/4 cup butter or margarine, softened

• 1 egg

• 1 tsp. grated lemon or orange zest

• 1 tsp. vanilla

• 2 1/4 cups of flour

• 1/4 tsp. salt

• few drops water or lemon juice (no more than 1 tsp or so)

• egg white wash and granulated sugar, or powdered sugar for sprinkling, if desired

• cherry pie filling or some other filling (see below—we love Comstock almond filling!)

 

• Cream butter or margarine, add sugar and beat 'til fluffy

• Beat in egg, lemon peel and vanilla.

• Add in flour and salt.

• Beat in water, a few drops at a time, until dough starts to come away from the sides.

• Lightly dust dough with flour and place in a zipped bag in the fridge for 2-3 hours.

• Roll out to 1/8 inch thickness, cut out circles, and place 2 cherries and filling on the circle

• shape into triangles by folding up 3 edges and pinching the corners.

• Before baking, you can brush each cookie with an egg white wash to make the cookie shine and dust with granulated sugar; or cook it as-is, using powdered sugar to finish it off after baking. (I never do either of these, but Hamentaschen are traditionally shiny!)

 

The Filling

 

This recipe uses cherry pie filling, but you can use prune, apricot, almond, or other fruit pastry fillings which can be store-bought. We also use our favorite jam or nuts with cinnamon-sugar.

[Guest Just Jen]

 

Bless you and may you know God in His fullness! We believed the way you described about two to three years ago (or were starting to more and more). But the more we studied what really actually happened in the early church -- as opposed to what the general Christian population in American thinks happened based on their own interpretations of the Scriptures and history from this vantage point 2000 years later -- the more we realized that the God was in the development of the early Church by the power of the Holy Spirit and that it is the fulfillment of those OT prefigurings. I don't expect you to agree, I'm just stating part of our process. I'm thankful you love God, and may you know Him better and better on your journey!

 

 

 

Thank you for your kind words. Just in case you didn't notice, I'm Australian, Aussie if you will. I don't have much of an idea at all of what Americans think. I do have a few questions for you though.

 

I was wondering if you could tell me which texts you studied to come to your conclusions? The texts which told you "what really actually happened". It would be very helpful.

 

When we are told in the Bible that God doesn't want His people taking on the traditions of others around them, how do you justify the celebration of Christmas and Easter, as both of these, to my knowledge as an ex-pagan, are rooted in pagan celebrations? Is this kind of thing not detestable to God? It is hard for me to see how the festivals of this world, that have been devised by men, can even compare with the God-given festivals.

 

Thank you for your time.

[Violet Crown]

When we are told in the Bible that God doesn't want His people taking on the traditions of others around them, how do you justify the celebration of Christmas and Easter, as both of these, to my knowledge as an ex-pagan, are rooted in pagan celebrations?

The most straightforward answer is, they are not rooted in pagan celebrations. This probably isn't the thread for this particular argument, but I have never been presented with evidence that would lead me to believe that these were ever anything but Christian feasts; and much evidence to convince me that the early Christians would not adopt pagan religious practices.

[kalphs]

Our study of Judaism began two years ago during a study of the nation of Israel with "Galloping the Globe."

Here are resources we have used in our home...

DK Jewish Holiday Cookbook

DK Children Just Like Me

DK Faith Like Mine

DK Eyewitness Judaism

Celebrating Hanukkah and Celebrating Passover by Diane Hoyt-Goldsmith

Books on Jewish celebrations by Cathy Goldberg Fishman

Rebecca 1914 American Girl series by Jacqueline Dunbar Green

Holiday Storybook Stew

Families of the World dvd series

Because of our studies we have developed a friendship with the members of our local synogague and have attended services in the temple.

Celebrating the Jewish holidays teaches our family the roots of our Christian faith are based in Judaism.

Therefore giving us a deeper appreciation for the Jewish faith, traditions and customs.

It is interesting to see how Judaism-Christianity are different yet they are linked together.

Edited December 30, 2010 by kalphs

[milovany]

Thank you for your kind words. Just in case you didn't notice, I'm Australian, Aussie if you will. I don't have much of an idea at all of what Americans think. I do have a few questions for you though.

 

I was wondering if you could tell me which texts you studied to come to your conclusions? The texts which told you "what really actually happened". It would be very helpful.

 

When we are told in the Bible that God doesn't want His people taking on the traditions of others around them, how do you justify the celebration of Christmas and Easter, as both of these, to my knowledge as an ex-pagan, are rooted in pagan celebrations? Is this kind of thing not detestable to God? It is hard for me to see how the festivals of this world, that have been devised by men, can even compare with the God-given festivals.

 

Thank you for your time.

 

And thank you for your gracious reply. As Sharon said above, the early church wasn't wrongly influenced (i.e., "taken") by the pagans and their celebrations. They may have been aware of these things and some of the feasts that developed in the Church may or may not be in response/relation to some of these things -- I don't know. But it doesn't matter really. The Holy Spirit developed the life of the Church in a certain way post-Ascension, and the gates of hell have not prevailed against it.

 

What I am convinced of in relation to the topic of this thread is that in the Christian perspective, the Church is the fulfillment of God's relationship with the Jewish people; the Jewish faith and practices are the root of the Christian church to be sure, and are the prefigurement, but what God did and is doing in the Church (Christ's very body) is where the focus now lies. In other words, what was to come has come, and we no longer needed the prefiguring; they are fulfilled. In the early church there was not a "Messianic Jewish" movement; when Jewish people at that time believed in Christ as the Messiah, they joined the "one, holy, catholic and apostolic" Church and became Christians, following the practices set forth therein. The Church still showed its Jewish roots, naturally: it had/has incense, hierarchy, vestments, candles, "the prayers," a festal cycle, etc, but in a distinctly Christian way.

 

Here is a link to one of the earliest extra Biblical writings called the Didache. It was written while many of the apostles were possibly still alive (est. A.D. 50-120). And here is a link to some of the other writings of the early church fathers, if you're interested. (With these, I would suggest reading the writings themselves, but ignore the interpretative notes that accompany the text since these are protestant in nature -- and the early church wasn't protestant).

 

You asked about how we can justify Christmas and Easter when these are not in the Bible -- and the most straightforward answer is that the early Church did not/does not subscribe to the doctrine of sola scriptura (which says the Bible is the foundation of the faith and is the only revelation of God to man). It couldn't function this way: for the first 300-400 years of the church no Scripture had been canonized. But maybe more importantly, the Bible itself does not teach sola scriptura -- it speaks of the Church being the foundation of the faith and of the tradition (oral teachings, practices) of the apostles in a positive way. (It's interesting to note that the Jewish faith was not/is not sola scriptura -- it was never solely based on the writings of the Old Testament.)

 

I hope some of this was helpful! If you have any other questions, please ask. I don't necessarily have all the answers, as we've only been eastern Orthodox Christians for a year, but it's been such a refreshing year. And we've grown so much in being a part of this rich, deep, historical church.

Edited December 30, 2010 by milovaný