Wednesday, 26 November 2025

Is It OK for Christians to Celebrate Christmas?

As we come towards the end of each year, most Christians start making preparations to celebrate Christmas. The vast majority of believers just celebrate this festival without thinking twice about it.

There are, however, some Christians who refuse to celebrate Christmas. They claim that doing this is against the will of God, and they give a number of arguments to try to make their case.

I am someone who sides with the majority in believing that there is nothing wrong with celebrating Christmas. In what follows, I will give some objections that are sometimes made to doing this, along with my responses.

When I have done that, I will then say a few words about some problems that are often connected with how Christmas is celebrated.

Objection:

The word ‘Christmas’ derives from the words ‘Christ’ and ‘mass’. ‘Mass’ here refers to the Roman Catholic rite that wrongly claims that the bread and wine eaten at the Lord’s Supper literally become the body and blood of Christ. So in times gone by ‘Christmas’ referred to an occasion when the problematic Catholic rite of mass was performed.

The bad origins of what this word referred to show that it is wrong for Christians to celebrate Christmas today.

Response:

It is true that the word ‘Christmas’ used to mean this. And it is also true that there are serious problems with the Roman Catholic rite of mass.

Importantly, however, the meanings of words often evolve away from their root meanings. What is important is what words mean today, not what they used to mean.

There are actually some striking biblical examples of where words that once referred to something evil are used to refer to something else.

For example, in Revelation 20:13 John uses the Greek word ‘hades’ to refer to the realm of the dead. However, at an earlier time (and actually also sometimes still in the first century AD) this Greek word was used to refer to Hades, the pagan god of the underworld, i.e., a false god of a false religion.

Clearly, John had no problem with using this word, despite its history. At the time when John wrote Revelation, this word could be used to refer to the realm of the dead, and that was good enough for him. And it was obviously also good enough for the Holy Spirit who inspired his words.

In the same way, the fact that the word ‘Christmas’ used to refer to mass is irrelevant. Today, when people refer to ‘Christmas’, they are not using this word to refer to mass, and that is what counts.

Objection:

In ancient times the pagan festival of Saturnalia, which involved worship of the false god Saturn, was celebrated on 25 December. Then Christians, influenced by Saturnalia, started celebrating Christmas on that date.

There is therefore a connection between Christmas and the demonically inspired Saturnalia. So Christians should steer clear of Christmas.

Response:

First, although Saturnalia was celebrated in mid-late December, it seems mostly not to have been celebrated specifically on 25 December.

Second, it is actually debated whether Christians started celebrating Christmas on 25 December because they were influenced by the timing of Saturnalia.

Third, even if Christians were influenced by the timing of Saturnalia, the choice of date for celebrating Christmas could have been intended to rival Saturnalia rather than because Christians were compromising on their values.

Fourth, even if some Christians did compromise on their values at that time, it is what people understand Christmas to mean today that counts. And today Christmas has nothing whatsoever to do with Saturnalia.

Objection:

The Bible knows nothing of celebrating Christmas. In the absence of any biblical instruction to do this, it is a mistake.

Response:

First, Christians who celebrate Christmas are, above all else, celebrating the coming of Jesus to earth, and the Bible obviously does celebrate this.

Second, as far as celebrating Jesus’ coming to earth on a certain day of the year is concerned, this objection, to a certain extent, misunderstands the nature of the Bible.

The Bible was never designed to give us a complete list of things to avoid or not avoid. Life is too complex with too many variations. If Scripture had been intended to do this, it would need to be many, many times longer than it is, and it would be unusable.

As far as Christian living is concerned, the Bible gives us principles that we need to build into a healthy, God-honouring way to live our lives. So the fact that Scripture gives no specific instruction to take a day of the year to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ is beside the point.

Third, a verse that is relevant for this topic is Romans 14:5, where Paul writes:

One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.’ (ESV)

It is true that here Paul is referring first and foremost to days of the seven-day week. But we can certainly expand what he says to include days that occur just once a year. And Paul clearly thinks that whether or not to treat a day as special is down to an individual Christian’s conscience.

Objection:

The practice of bringing trees inside the home stems from pagan customs that celebrated evergreen trees in some superstitious way.

Therefore, Christians should keep away from this aspect of Christmas, because of its pagan roots.

Response:

Again, it is what things symbolise today that counts, and today Christmas trees are typically just ornamental with no deeper meaning.

Problems connected with how Christmas is often celebrated

None of the arguments that I have listed leads us to think that it is wrong for Christians to celebrate Christmas.

That said, there are certainly some highly relevant moral issues to do with the way that Christmas is celebrated in Western countries.

For a start, the way that Christmas is commercialised is nothing short of horrendous. Many people, in effect, use remembering Jesus’ coming to earth in self-sacrifice as a means of making as much money for themselves as they can. There is a real irony in this.

One thing I personally hate is when anything to do with Christmas appears in the shops before December. Sadly, however, this often happens several months before December. And the motive is all about making money. It really is bad.

Christmas is also used by many as an excuse for immoral behaviour. Workplace Christmas parties, for example, often lead to drunkenness and sexual immorality. And at Christmas time many people allow their greed for food to go unchecked. There is no doubt that these are things that deeply grieve the Lord.

Another thing I think is problematic is the whole idea of Santa. It doesn’t seem right for parents to lie to their children to make them think that some supernatural figure has travelled through the air to give them presents.

It is absolutely right that parents should want their kids to have a great time at Christmas. But there are many ways to do this that don’t involve creating a deceptive story in which a character behaves supernaturally without any reference to God.

Doing it right

Celebrating Christmas is all well and good. It’s not compulsory for Christians to do this, but it’s not wrong either.

But for those of us who do celebrate it, we need to remember that it is mainly about how God humbled Himself to become Man for our sake.

It isn’t wrong to meet up with family and friends, give and receive presents, eat plenty of good food, take some time to rest, etc., etc. But at its heart, Christmas is a story of the ultimate gift of Jesus Christ Himself.

 

See also:

Christians Need to Put Everything to the Test

The Bible, God’s Voice and Useful Information

Should Christians Treat One Day of the Week as a Special Day?

Nothing Is Sinful Because It Is Pleasurable

Wednesday, 5 November 2025

Was It God Who Brought Suffering on Job?

The experience of Job, described in great detail in the book that bears his name, is one of the classic biblical examples of suffering.

In the book Satan asks God for permission to attack Job, God allows it, and then Satan goes on to cause Job intense and almost unbearable suffering.

Job’s suffering is said to come from God

One of the things that the book of Job tells us is that the suffering Satan inflicted on Job came from God. There is no doubt that this is what the book teaches.

Immediately after the first series of disasters that struck Job – losing his animals, servants and children – we are told in Job 1:20-22:

20 Then Job arose and tore his robe and shaved his head and fell on the ground and worshiped. 21 And he said, “Naked I came from my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return. The LORD gave, and the LORD has taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD.” 22 In all this Job did not sin or charge God with wrong.’ (ESV)

Job’s words in v. 21 clearly show that he believes that what he has just lost was taken away by God. It is true that Job doesn’t know about Satan asking for God’s permission to hurt him. Nevertheless, there is no suggestion in the text that Job is making a mistake when he says that God has taken away what he has lost.

Furthermore, the comment by the narrator in v. 22 seems to take it for granted that God did indeed take away what Job has lost.

Similarly, in Job 2:10, after Job has contracted an awful disease and his wife has told him to curse God and die, we are told:

‘But he said to her, “You speak as one of the foolish women would speak. Shall we receive good from God, and shall we not receive evil?” In all this Job did not sin with his lips.’ (ESV)

In this verse ‘evil’ doesn’t mean moral evil but refers to suffering.

Again, there is no doubt that Job believes that the disease he has contracted is something that came to him from God. And again too, there is no suggestion in the text that Job is mistaken.

What is more, as with the previous passage, the comment of the narrator at the end of the verse seems to imply that Job’s disease came to him from God’s hand.

In the passages I have just cited there seems to be no good reason for thinking that Job is mistaken when he attributes his sufferings to God’s actions. However, some readers of this article might not be convinced by this.

Crucially, however, there is another passage in Job which teaches the same thing and which cannot reasonably be understood as a mistaken idea.

In Job 42:11, right at the end of the book, the narrator says:

‘Then came to him all his brothers and sisters and all who had known him before, and ate bread with him in his house. And they showed him sympathy and comforted him for all the evil that the LORD had brought upon him.’ (ESV)

Again, ‘evil’ in this verse is not moral evil but refers to suffering.

The comment here that the LORD brought evil on Job is not something that Job says but is a comment of the narrator, i.e., the inspired author. Although in the book of Job there are many wrong ideas about suffering that need to be corrected, importantly, never in this book does the narrator make a mistake. Job and his friends have some wrong ideas about things, but this never, ever applies to the narrator.

Just as importantly, in chapter 42 we have reached a place in the book where wrong ideas have been left behind.

All things considered, then, we should have no hesitation in saying that the book of Job portrays Job’s sufferings as coming to him from the hand of God, as well as from the hand of Satan.

A suggestion for how to understand this

So how are we to understand this? What Satan does to Job is certainly a morally evil thing. So if the book of Job says that what Satan did to Job came from God’s hand, does this mean that God is complicit in moral evil?

Not at all! I would suggest the following as a way to think about this:

For Satan to hurt Job, two crucially important decisions had to be made. First, Satan had to make a clear and specific decision to hurt Job if he was able. And second, God had to make a clear and specific decision to allow Satan to hurt Job. If either of these decisions had not been made, Satan would not have hurt Job.

God’s decision to allow Satan to hurt Job was so essential for Job’s sufferings to happen, that in a sense what happened to Job came from God’s hand.

This is not to say that Job’s sufferings came to him from Satan and from God in the same sort of way. The sense in which his sufferings came from Satan’s hand is very different from the sense in which his sufferings came from God’s hand.

Nor is it to say that God caused Satan to choose to hurt Job. God only permitted Satan to do his evil work. But God’s permission was so crucial in enabling Satan to hurt Job that the book of Job describes what happened to Job as coming from God’s hand.

The same is true any time we are sinned against

There is no good reason for thinking that the place of God in our sufferings today is any different from the place of God in Job’s sufferings.

Any time you or I suffer something, God has made a clear and specific decision not to stop it, and in that sense it has come to us from His hand. He could have stopped it, but for wise reasons mostly beyond our understanding, He has chosen not to.

This includes times when someone sins against us. God could have stopped it but He deliberately chose not to, so in that sense the suffering that we have experienced from the sinner has come from God’s hand.

This is not to say that God caused the sinner to commit the sin, or that He wanted the sinner to commit the sin, or that He doesn’t hate the sin, or that He doesn’t care about what we go through, or that He doesn’t love us. But it is to say that God is totally in control of what He does and doesn’t allow to happen to us.

Not only is God totally in control of this, but we also we know from Romans 8:28 that all the things experience, including our sufferings, work together for our good. And we can take great comfort from knowing that.

 

See also:

Charismatic Churches and Their Attitude to Hardship

Some Things for Christians to Do When They Are Hanging on by Their Fingernails

Taking Heart from the Apostle Paul’s Experiences of Setbacks and Failed Plans

What to Do If You Feel Like Blaming God for Something