Is Christmas paganism?

I understand what you are saying, and for many years of my life I lived it. And as I have said, we are all free to choose. But if I take the human emotion out of the equation and listen to the Word's of the Bible, the truth is the entire creation of Christmas is from "another voice", and not from the Author of my salvation. You and I both know this. Is Christ so vain that He would reject His Father's Feast's and replace them with His birthday celebration on an ancient Pagan High Day? Certainly not the Christ I know.

Was the Christ born on Dec. 25th? No, it is a falsehood to teach this. Not the Truth.

Is this really just an ancient Pagan Celebration that someone placed the Christ's name on and deemed it "Christian"? We both know this is true as well.

Is the Christ the father of lies? I don't believe He is. Does He not promote Truth? Would the Messiah of the Bible want me to promote a lie even if it looked good to religious man? I know you can see my point.

Eph. 6:
11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. (Our mind?)
13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;


So if I take all the Word's my Master has given me for Armor and weigh them against this worldly accepted "Religious" celebration that there is no mention of in the Bible other than "don't do it". It seems clear to me.


I know how hard it is to let go of tradition. The Mainstream Preachers of Christ's time killed their own Savior in order to preserve their doctrines and traditions of man, and they killed the Prophets before Him. Can we teach our children about the Love of God without man made religious traditions not founded on truth? I believe we must.

But if you get right down to it. No matter what "WE" do, how "WE" spin it, no matter how much "Good" we do during this High Day. It is still a Pagan celebration that some man decided to place the Name of Christ on. It is not the Christ's Birthday. No one, not the Wise men, not Peter, not the Disciple who loved Him the most, not the Prophets before Him, no one in the Bible ever promoted the annual celebration of placing His Name on a Pagan High Day and calling it His Birthday. So in reality, this entire religious tradition is not founded on the Truth, but on a falsehood. For this reason I know the Christ is not it's author.

I say these things not in condemnation of anyone. But to simply acknowledge the truth about the origins of this High Day that is "Set apart" by the religions of this world. Does it matter? Well that's a decision each man must make for themselves. Like Paul said: "Let each man be convinced in their own mind."

I can tell you that from a man who has been freed from this tradition, that once you see it from the outside looking in, you will understand why the Messiah said to take His Yoke upon us and learn from Him, not religious traditions of man.

Well then you don't believe my understanding of the scriptures. I'm OK with that.

But you have been accusing me of not showing you my source for my belief that the Mainstream Preachers of Christ's time and before had corrupted the scriptures.

So it isn't that I haven't shown you my source, it's just that you don't believe my understanding of what is written.

I posted the scriptures which support my belief that there were priests and Prophets in Christ's time who were liars and had corrupted God's Words.

Are you now saying that I am understanding these verses incorrectly? Maybe you can show me in the verses I posted where I am wrong.

Well we face the matter of tradition or truth. If truth takes priority you might want to find out where the origin of egg dying comes from, I'll give you a hint: the godess Ishtar, also known as Ashtoreth, Eostre, and the Queen of Heaven...

as long as you think you have authority over Scripture, to do with as you wish, then I or no one else can show you anything.

you will, and do, and have dismissed anything that does not agree with you, since you have all your ducks in a row, and also you think you have authority over Scripture.

but, if you want to be shown ( not that you have any intention of admitting or correcting your theology )., go back through your exchanges with posthuman. he has given you tons of sound theology.

But you are the one who says I am posting these scriptures and my understanding of them is false. Since you are the one who has been saying over and over that I didn't reveal my source, and you have also said this same thing to others in threads I wasn't even partaking in, don't you think it is appropriate for you, the accuser, to show me how the Priests and Prophets didn't corrupt God's Word as I believe?

Come on now G9, it's your horse, you saddled it. How is my understanding that the Pharisees and Priests corrupted God's Word not true. It is a foundation of my belief. If it isn't true I need to know it. Don't you have an obligation to show me how they did not corrupt the scriptures? Or will you just walk by and wish me well.

you view them as YOU fulfilling them

I view them as fulfilled by Christ Jesus

you judge with a dead covenant

It alwsy you you you... quote where I said I fulfill the Law? you never speak on the Scriptures I post simply focus on me... and it;s a twisted view IMO.

blah blah blah

I would think a person would post relevant scripture if they wish to make a point

relevant to the discussion

try it some time

You just accused me I was saying provide the evidence and I was asking you to focus on Scripture rather than talk me down. If I said things so wrong you would quote posts where I claim what you say... Then when I defend myself you say this....

Here... This is a Scripture relevant to the topic:

Jeremiah 10:1-5, “Hear the word which YHWH speaks concerning you, O house of Israyl. This is what YHWH says: Do not learn the way of the heathen and do not be deceived by the signs of heaven; though the heathen are deceived by them For the religious customs of the peoples are vain; worthless! For one cuts a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the ax. They decorate it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, so that it will not move; topple over. They are upright, like a palm tree, but they cannot speak; they must be carried, because they cannot go by themselves. Do not give them reverence! They cannot do evil, nor is it in them to do righteousness!”

so you are not going to answer the questions I asked you?

what a surprise

and I say again, mixing law with salvation is the actual problem occuring in your understanding

I find that practice very distasteful and the boasting that goes along with it is equally so

the only reason I ever responded to something you wrote is because of what you said here in your post #23

I know and ones heart who is truly changed by Yah will not mixing paganisim with His worship, especially when they know and will seek to find what is proper and improper. Honestly I think many people don;t really care, most want a religion that makes them happy as opposed to a religion that is what YHWH wants... and none of us are perfect but Yah willing He will strengthen those who seek Him in truth and turn the hearts of those that don't know any better to His truth.

John 4:24, “Yah is Spirit, and those who worship Him need to worship in spirit and truth.”

Im not a fan of the hebrew roots movement but I agree with mr Shamah here that this sounds too much like a christmas tree for me to ever get one!

Ps.eggs were dyed then in thethe blood of sacrificed babys

I read an interesting article on dangers of the Hebrew Roots movement - https://answersingenesis.org/presuppositions/dangers-hebrew-roots-movement/

The article points out that followers of the Hebrew Roots movement believe that all believers in Christ are obligated to follow Jewish laws and practices from the books of Moses. In some groups, extrabiblical rabbinic teachings and traditions are elevated (if not in official doctrinal beliefs then in practice) to the same level as Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

Although they often speak of keeping the “law,” they are usually inconsistent in how this is understood and defined. For example, certain laws are either broken or neglected while a great deal of attention is placed on keeping the Sabbath (Friday sunset through Saturday sunset) and celebrating the feasts mentioned in Leviticus 23. Hmm.. that sounds very familiar.

The article went on to say that many of the most serious errors of the Hebrew Roots movement stem from its understanding of certain biblical covenants. Chief among these understandings is the notion that “the law” was intended to be binding on all people throughout history. Part of the rationale behind this notion stems from certain statements from Jesus.

The Hebrew Roots movement makes much of the fact that Jesus said he did not come to abolish the Law and that he stressed the importance of keeping commandments. In their view, this means that the law must still be in force today—even on Gentiles, although they were not under the law in Old Testament times (Ephesians 2:11–13). That also sounds very familiar.

Somehow they seem to overlook or interpret the last part of Matthew 5:17 in a much different way than Christians have typically done. Jesus said he came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets. By living a sinless life (2 Corinthians 5:21), and then dying as the ultimate sacrifice, our Passover (1 Corinthians 5:7), Jesus Christ fulfilled the law (Colossians 2:14). This is why the Apostle Paul confidently wrote that those who have been saved by faith in Jesus Christ are “not under the law” (Romans 6:14, 7:4; Galatians 5:18).

Furthermore, it is highly questionable to assume that Jesus had the Mosaic Law in mind when he told the disciples to keep his commandments. Earlier in the same evening, he commanded the disciples to love one another (John 13:34), and he gave them several commands during his ministry that are not spelled out in the Mosaic law. It is far more likely that Christ’s words in John 14:15 referred to these instructions.

The article also goes on to say that the Gospel does not depend on the works of the Law. In Colossians 2, Paul explained that the Colossian believers, who were of the uncircumcision (i.e., Gentiles) had been “circumcised with a circumcision made without hands” having been saved “through faith in the powerful working of God” (Colossians 2:11–12). This circumcision made without hands refers to a circumcision of the heart, which comes through the Spirit (Romans 2:25–29).

The previous paragraph laid the framework for what Paul told these Gentile believers next. “Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ” (Colossians 2:16–17). As we have already seen in Acts 15 and Galatians, the early churches often consisted of contingents of both Jews and Gentiles, and they struggled with the dynamic of Gentiles being “brought near by the blood of Christ” (Ephesians 2:13). Many of the Gentile believers had been told that they need to believe in Jesus and follow some or all of the Mosaic law. But, as he did in Galatians, Paul rejected such a view and told these Gentiles not to let anyone judge them if they did not follow Jewish customs, such as the dietary laws, festivals, new moons, or Sabbaths.

Amazingly enough, Hebrew Roots movement teachers flip the meaning of this verse on its head, claiming that Paul is telling them not to let anyone judge them for now keeping these practices. Such an interpretation is exactly the opposite of what Paul stated. The whole thrust of the passage is that a person is saved by faith alone and not by human effort, such as legalism. Another familiar argument.

Very interesting article! The article also mentions that it is difficult to document the movement’s history because of its lack of organizational structure, but the modern Hebrew Roots movement has been influenced in some ways by Seventh-Day Adventism and the Worldwide Church of God during the lifetime of its founder, Herbert W. Armstrong. That explains a lot!

Of course you are speaking against Hebrew Roots for they believe in all scripture and the church is trying to do away with following God as scripture tells us of Him. Pharisees tried to do away with Christ for the same reason. These people keep using law as the main way they attack. Scripture has a lot to say about law, it is major. So these anti=God people use falsehoods about "what they believe" about law in their attack of anyone believing God spoke in the OT.

Scripture says clearly those of YHWH guard His Commands and have faith in Yahshua:

Revelation 12:17, “And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to fight with the remnant of her seed, those guarding the Commands of יהוה and possessing the Witness of יהושע Messiah."

It also says evil forces would seek to change the Appointed time and Laws in the minds of the people:

Daniyl 7:25, "And he will speak great words against YHWH, and will wear out; mentally attack to cause to fall away, the saints of YHWH, and think to change times and Laws…"

Where did you get your Daniel 7:25 verse from what bible.

Ive read close to 40 Different trans. and none say mentally attack to cause to fall away and you left off the latter part of the verse. why you do such things?

That is my fault the is supposed to be bracketed or in italics, the new website removes all formatting except underline and bold. IN KJV fashion supplied words are italicised.

Here is a full beakdown of the text:

Daniel 7:25, "And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change appointed times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time."





“appointed times” is word #H2166 – zeman, Hebrew Word Study (Transliteration-Pronunciation Etymology & Grammar) 1) a set time, time, season





H2166 זְמָן zman (zem-awn') n-m., an appointed occasion., [(Aramaic) from H2165], KJV: season, time., Root(s): H2165





H2165 זְמָן zman (zem-awn') n-m., an appointed occasion., [from H2163], KJV: season, time., Root(s): H2163





H2163 זָמַן zaman (zaw-man') v., to fix (a time)., [a primitive root], KJV: appoint.





Psalms 74:4, “Your adversaries have roared In the midst of Your appointments; They have set up their own signs as signs.”






Genesis 1:14, "And the Mighty One said, “Let lights come to be in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and appointed times, and for days and years.”





Psalm 104:19, "You appointed the moon for setting the appointed times. The sun knows its going down."





“appointed times” is word #H4150 - Original Word: מוֹעֵד, Part of Speech: Noun Masculine, Transliteration: moed, Phonetic Spelling: (mo-ade'), Short Definition: meeting, Word Origin from yaad, Definition - appointed time, place, or meeting





Leviticus 23:2-4, “Speak to the children of Yisra’ĕl, and say to them, ‘The appointed times (#H4150) of יהוה, which you are to proclaim as set-apart (#H6944) gatherings (#H4744), My appointed times (#H4150), are these: Six days work is done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath (#H7676) of rest (#H7677), a set-apart (#H6944) gathering (#H4744). You do no work, it is a Sabbath to יהוה in all your dwellings. These are the appointed times (#H4150) of יהוה, set-apart (#H6944) gatherings (#H4744) which you are to proclaim at their appointed times (#H4150)."





"appointed times" is word #H4150 מוֹעֵד mow`ed (mo-ade') n-m. 1. (properly) an appointment, i.e. a fixed time or season., 2. (specifically) a festival., 3. (conventionally) a year., 4. (by implication) an assembly (as convened for a definite purpose)., 5. (technically) the congregation., 6. (by extension) the place of meeting., 7. (also) a signal (as appointed beforehand)., [from H3259], KJV: appointed (sign, time), (place of, solemn) assembly, congregation, (set, solemn) feast, (appointed, due) season, solemn(-ity), synogogue, (set) time (appointed). , Root(s): H3259





"set-apart" is word #H6944 קֹדֶשׁ qodesh (ko'-desh) n-m. 1. a holy thing., 2. (of location) a holy place., 3. (of event) a holy event (i.e. a memorial)., 4. (abstract, rarely) holiness., 5. (double emphasized) Holy of Holies (the holy place of holy places, the most holiest place)., 6. Holy (Spirit)., [from H6942]


KJV: consecrated (thing), dedicated (thing), hallowed (thing), holiness, (X most) holy (X day, portion, thing), saint, sanctuary. , Root(s): H6942 , See also: H4720, G39





"gatherings" is word #H4744 מִקרָא miqra' (mik-raw') n-m. 1. something called out, i.e. regarding citizens (the act of, the persons, or the place)., 2. a calling forth (of the congregation) to assemble., 3. (as an event, with H6944) a (holy) called out memorial (i.e. a recalling to collective memory; the appointed feasts; see Leviticus 23:2)., 4. (specially) a called out assembly (of the Redeemed Kinsmen of Yahweh— out of captivity; see Nehemiah 8:8, then Exodus 6:6, Exodus 15:13)., 5. (specifically, of Yeshua) a called out assembly of the Redeemed of Yeshua (Jesus), both of Jew (first) and of Gentile— from Moral Failure and Death (see progression from Isaiah 4:5, Matthew 18:17, Matthew 16:18, Acts 2:47)., 6. (Note #1) (The called out assembly is the citizenry of the Redeemed of Jesus; the citizenry under his Redemption and Kingship; Although identified regionally, the citizens of Redemption differs by nature from a local gathering, synagogue, congregation, or the institution of church. “What redemption do you belong to?”)., 7. (Note #2) From Matthew 16:18, Yeshua said, “I will build מִקְרָאֶתִי , my called out assembly.” When residing upon mount Tsiyon (Zion), it is figuratively called “מִקְרָאֶהָ , her called out assembly” in Isaiah 4:5. Aside from this, it is never personalized by anyone else in Scripture; we belong to him., [from H7121], KJV: assembly, calling, convocation, reading. , Root(s): H7121 , See also: G1577





Daniyl Chapter 2-7 is written in Aramaic, not Hebrew. The Israylites were taken captive to Babylon and made to forget their ways under the rule of the Bablonian king. “Zem-awn'” is an Aramaic word, and is the literal equivilent of the Hebrew word “moadim” - word #H4150 meaning: “appointed times”





"time" for , “a time and times and the dividing of time” Is a different root word from the first thus showing it conveys a different meaning.





“a time and times and the dividing of time” is word #H5732 – iddan, Strong's Concordance - iddan: time, Original Word: עִדָּן, Part of Speech: Noun Masculine, Transliteration: iddan, Phonetic Spelling: (id-dawn'), Short Definition: time

I see cool, you don't want to go and change times and laws to fit a need. not saying you've done that but it could be viewed as changing scripture verses and is not good thing.

Just for the recored Im not "hebrew roots" I dont belong to or indentify with any group. People just try to steortype to then hand all the errors of others upon their victim.

Scripture says clearly those of YHWH guard His Commands and have faith in Yahshua:

Revelation 12:17, “And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to fight with the remnant of her seed, those guarding the Commands of יהוה and possessing the Witness of יהושע Messiah."

It also says evil forces would seek to change the Appointed time and Laws in the minds of the people:

Daniyl 7:25, "And he will speak great words against YHWH, and will wear out; mentally attack to cause to fall away, the saints of YHWH, and think to change times and Laws…"

Okay then. I apologize for grouping you up with them.

How do you like my theory with the types and shadows where baptism replaces circumcision? Colossians 2:11-12ff

There are verses about not changing the word, that verse is not one of them and does not even remotely mean anything close to that. With that said I forgot to put italics in... It did not stray from the meaning of the text thus it could be translation, have you read the "Amplified Bible"? They explain passages in the text that there is not word for word translation of but generally stay within what Scripture means. I myself prefer more mechanical translations but each has their value. Finally I see your desire to find fault...