Friday, December 20, 2024

Part I

---

A Protestant Christmas: How Protestants Came to Celebrate the Incarnation of Christ as Christmas

Now, the way the year works is that today is the last kind of normal day of business for most people here in the United States. Now, there are those, of course, whose lives don’t accommodate that kind of schedule, who are in medical fields or in special fields that simply do not allow for that kind of holiday observance. But when it comes to the schools, when it comes to most businesses, when it comes to the world of finance even, and so many things, there is a pause that is about to go into effect. And that pause is because of what the secular world calls the holidays, but what we as Christians refer to as Christmas.

Now, I just want to point out there is an awful lot of hypocrisy and confusion about Christmas in the secular culture, but let’s put a pause on that for a moment and let’s just think about Christians at Christmas. I think one thing that would surprise many Christians is to understand that for at least a lot of Christian history, and in particular, in more recent Christian history, Christmas has been controversial. And in particular it was controversial in the tradition of the Puritans. The Puritans on both sides of the Atlantic were quite concerned about worldly amusements and worldly pleasures. And they were quite concerned about anything that would approach something like a Roman Catholic festival, something like the old Roman Catholic holy days.

So there was the fear that the observation of Christmas would come with several theological errors and spiritual missteps, that it would come as something like a festival day in the sense that you had the Saints’ days and all the rest in the old Roman Catholic calendar, and you had people who cared a lot more about the calendar than they did about the substance of the Christian faith. So there was the sense that every day is a day unto the Lord. Every Lord’s Day is to be respected as the Lord’s Day, and there are to be no real special observances otherwise. And then there were also those who were pretty radical in their Protestantism who feared that the observation of a Christian year was, A, perhaps rooted in paganism and B, certainly rooted in Catholic tradition.

So you had more radical Protestants who said that as you look at Christmas, one of the problems is that in historic terms, you’ve had many pagan societies and other societies that have a winter festival and they have a spring festival and both of them come with attendant dangers, especially since, and by the way, this is perhaps even more true of what is called Easter, more properly called the Festival of the Resurrection on the Christian calendar, it’s even more true there because let’s just say that many civilizations coming up with some kind of festival for the Spring made it a festival of procreation and reproduction. And I’ll just leave it at that and say you do the math.

But coming back to Christmas, the Puritans were quite concerned about the continuation of that kind of paganism, and they saw it directly in conduit with the Roman Catholic observation of Christmas and of Easter, the masses that were held, also the festivals that were held. So they basically said, “This is wrong.” The larger Protestant tradition was not in agreement with that. But the larger Protestant Reformation tradition was concerned about the integrity of Christmas. Now, one of the interesting things, by the way, is that what we consider Christmas as an observation with a Christmas tree and all the kinds of decorations with evergreen and all the rest, that is actually more European than it was properly English, and it was particularly German and particularly rooted in the Protestant Reformation, Luther’s Reformation in Germany.

Now, one of the interesting things in the Reformation is that you had Martin Luther there in Wittenberg in Germany leading the Lutheran Reformation. You would later have for example, John Calvin in Geneva leading the reformed Protestant movement, the more Calvinistic movement. And especially when you look at the Lutheran Reformation, one of the distinctions between the Lutheran Reformation and the Calvinist Reformation there in Geneva was the fact that the Lutheran Reformation, Martin Luther himself, maintained much of the church calendar. Luther even allowed for the observation of Saints’ days. And Luther also allowed for something that was, say, beyond a normal Protestant admiration for Mary. And I would say one of the reasons why is because Luther was very much a medieval man. He was very much a Catholic man until he came to Reformation convictions.

And Luther himself did not take the Reformation in every aspect to its logical conclusion. That was something that, by the way, is not particularly a criticism, I think it’s just an observation. Luther on the front end of the Reformation, he was having to fight for justification by faith alone, the principle of Scripture alone, the holidays would wait. But it is really interesting that the German traditions, having to do with Christmas and the Christmas celebration, had a great deal to do with the development of what became a Christmas tree and the ornamentation with evergreens and all the rest and the festivals. And the Christmas tree itself came to Great Britain largely as a German import and largely through a German prince. And that would be Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, who was, of course, the husband to Queen Victoria, or the woman who became Queen Victoria.

And as you understand that Victoria, who by the way had a lot of German background already, she married a German prince, the German prince comes over as Prince Albert. And by the way, it is a royal love story, a true one. They were genuinely in love with one another. Victoria never got over the early death of Prince Albert or Albert the Prince Consort, her husband. And by the way, they had a very large family that was a part of the dynastic ambitions of monarchy. And Victoria and Albert were very productive when it came to children and they had a lot of young children in the palace. The habit of the British aristocracy at the time was that you had adults who ate and who celebrated very much separate from their children. If you had enough money, your children were not seen, your children were not a part of the celebration.

The parents would eat with other adults in some great dining hall and the children would be taken care of by nannies and other servants. That was not the way it was in Germany with a far more familial context, by the way, not only of Christmas, but of the larger week as a matter of fact, just normal life. It was far more familial in that sense among the German nobility than among the British or the English aristocracy. But now you have Victoria married to Albert, and Albert brought those German traditions not only into England, he brought those German traditions right into Buckingham Palace and other royal residences right down to a Christmas tree. And by the way, on both sides of the Atlantic, there was a revolution that was brought by Prince Albert and that revolution came with the use of the Christmas tree.

This was a legitimizing aspect. If Prince Albert and Queen Victoria can have a Christmas tree, then so can I, so can the rest of us. But the really amazing thing is that Prince Albert arranged for an illustrator to be able to draw an illustration of Queen Victoria and Queen Albert with their children celebrating Christmas. That was earth-shaking. That changed the perception of Christmas in much of the English-speaking world. And on both sides of the Atlantic, it became a very well-known illustration. It was widely published in both the United States and in Great Britain, and it legitimated the use of the Christmas tree and it brought a very German Christmas into a lot of family life, a lot of cultural life in the United States when most people had no idea this had been imported from Germany. They had less of an idea that it was Prince Albert who was in many ways the vector for that influence.

By the way, if you look at the British version of that illustration, and you look at the American version of that illustration, a couple of things will pop out at you. Number one, it’s rather odd that Queen Victoria is entirely in regalia for a family Christmas, but nonetheless, that’s the way the illustration was made because that’s the way you drew Queen Victoria. But the other thing is that in the British illustration, Prince Albert is in head-to-toe military uniform. In the American illustration, he’s in civilian clothes. We’ll take the German Christmas, thank you. We’ll leave behind the German militarism. But I want to go back to Luther for a moment, and I want to say a part of the sweetness of Martin Luther is Martin Luther’s understanding of Christmas. A part of the sweetness of Martin Luther, and it really is a sweetness, it’s the sweetness of his theology, it’s the sweetness of his devotional life, it’s the sweetness of the hymnody that he produced.

It is deeply rooted in his Christian faith, in his Reformation doctrine, in his understanding of why we celebrate Christmas. So he wrote widely on Christmas, he wrote widely on the incarnation of the Lord Jesus Christ. And remember, that among the solas of the Reformation, it is not only grace alone and faith alone, it is not only Scripture alone, it’s not only ultimately to the glory of God alone, it is also Christ alone. It is the work of Christ alone that saves. Christ is the one mediator between God and sinners. And that’s the amazing fact of Christmas that Martin Luther wanted to point to. It is the Word become flesh, it is the Word become flesh for our salvation. And as I said, Martin Luther was very tender towards Mary, just thinking about this very young woman on whom such responsibility had fallen and this young woman who gives us such an illustration of faithfulness. He also pointed to the faithfulness of Joseph after the angelic message had come to him in a dream, “You shall call His name Jesus, for He shall save His people from their sins.” 

After the Reformation, when you come to more modern times, there’s been a theological assault upon Christmas. We often think of the secular assault on Christmas. We need to think about the theological assault upon Christmas. There’s been an assault upon the doctrine of Christ. There has been an assault upon the biblical teachings concerning the incarnation. There’s been an assault upon every aspect of Christ’s life, including his bodily resurrection from the dead. But there is also a subversion of the doctrine of Christ when it comes to how he came to be born of Mary in Bethlehem. The doctrine of the virgin conception of Christ, that’s the best way to put it.

We’ll call it the Virgin Birth because that’s what it’s commonly called, but the most important aspect of the doctrine of the Virgin Birth is that Jesus was conceived in Mary by the Holy Ghost. So it is the conception that is the most important issue here. And back in the 19th century, continuing, of course, unto our own times, going back to the rise of theological liberalism in the 19th century, there were so many people who said, “I want the sweet Jesus and his morality. I don’t want all this claims about virgin births and bodily resurrections from the dead.” But as the Apostle Paul told us, and warned us going all the way back to the first century, all the way back to the Book of 1 Corinthians, if indeed Christ is not bodily raised from the dead, then we are still dead in our sins and our trespasses.

And by the way, I think there’s a very clear reference to the Virgin Birth in the writings of the Apostle Paul in Galatians 4. But I just wanted to state that if Jesus Christ was not conceived within Mary by the Holy Spirit, then we have an equally large problem. It’s really important that we understand that even as Jesus Christ became man, he was born that man no more may die, but we must also recognize that it is of utmost importance that we take Christmas as a whole, that we affirm all that the Scripture reveals concerning Christ and not only his birth, but his birth right down to every single detail. Nothing is extraneous, nothing is unnecessary, all of it is true, and all of it is glorious. Some of the most glorious truths revealed in Scripture concerning the incarnation of Christ and the biblical accounts of the birth of Christ, the larger meaning, the incarnation, come down to hymns and indeed, some of the hymns and songs we refer to as Christmas carols.

I just want to give a word of encouragement here. I’m not saying that there is nothing good that has been written in terms of Christmas music in the last 100 years, in the last 200 years, in the last 300 years. That is not what I’m saying. I am saying this: Especially in the English hymnic tradition, in the metrical hymn Christmas carol tradition, there is a tradition of Christian doctrine in the story of the birth of Christ that is carried through not only in words, but in music that joined together, have been passed down from generation to generation. Those so-called traditional Christmas carols include rich theological content. And furthermore, even just hearing the melody line of those carols immediately strikes a doctrinal, and a spiritual note in our hearts. I’m not saying don’t sing any modern music. I am saying, do sing the traditional carols.

Do sing the traditional Christmas hymns. Sing them often, sing them in full, and sing them loudly. And please do not allow your children to be raised without knowing those Christmas hymns, knowing immediately what they mean, and knowing how much they mean to you, and you hope, by God’s grace one day, to them.

Part II

---

How Do We Understand Promise and Fulfillment in Matthew’s Use of Hosea 11:1? — Dr. Mohler Responds to Letters from Listeners to The Briefing

All right, I’m going to transition with that word of exhortation to questions. And we received a lot of questions, not coincidentally, about the incarnation and about Christmas. So let’s turn to those.

Okay, the first question is from Portland, Oregon. Listener says, “I have a question that is related to the Christmas story in Jesus’s life as a baby.” He cites Matthew chapter 2, verse 15, which tells us that they remained in Egypt until the death of Herod, “That it might be fulfilled, which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet saying, ‘Out of Egypt I have called my son.'” He then says, “In this verse, Matthew understands that this aspect of Jesus’s life as an infant fulfills Hosea 11:1. In terms of understanding prophecy and fulfillment, how do you understand this to work? Do you think this would’ve been in Hosea’s mind at all or do you think it’s something that Matthew sees that Hosea did not?

Now, okay, this is something Christians have had to think through and reason in terms of scriptural reasoning about for centuries, for a very long time. And it is an especially interesting issue in the Gospel of Matthew, because Matthew will tell us this took place in order that the Scripture may be fulfilled. And there’s several aspects of that in which you look at the Scripture that’s being cited there and you realize this is not what the first readers of that text or the first hearers of that text was thinking about. So is that legitimate or illegitimate? I think the best way to understand this is that it is quite clear in Scripture there is a dual fulfillment of some prophecies. You say, “Well, which ones?” Well, the one Scripture tells us have a dual fulfillment. That’s the ones. In other words, this is another indication of the perfection of Scripture.

We understand that this was in fulfillment of Hosea 11:1, “Out of Egypt I have called my son,” specifically because the Holy Spirit inspired Matthew to tell us this. And the Holy Spirit would not lie to us. The Holy Spirit is conveying to us the inerrant, infallible, unchanging truth of God’s word. So this does remind us that in the pattern of promise and fulfillment, which is the larger pattern of Scripture, there are other patterns, but the overarching pattern is promise and fulfillment, there was a proximate and a more distant fulfillment that, honestly, we would not know to connect except for the Holy Spirit connecting the proximate and the ultimate fulfillment, by revealing these things to Matthew and Matthew conveying these things in his gospel. But Matthew does convey these things in the gospel and thus, they are unquestionably true.

And not only that, our knowledge is for our profit and it is a reminder of the power of the prophetic word in these situations in which it was even more powerful than was understood at the time. And its fulfillment was even more glorious than was understood at the time. There was a proximate and in some cases, an ultimate fulfillment of Scripture. And this just points to the wonder and the power of God’s prophecy. The words he gave through the prophets, it turns out that the fulfillment is even more glorious than was understood at the time and even more glorious than was understood, at least we might suspect, on the part of the prophet himself.

Remember that God is speaking through the prophet in such a way that when we say, “Hosea speaks this,” we fully mean that God speaks this. I do appreciate the question. The question is grounded in a very careful reading of Scripture and it’s grounded in an understanding that the Scripture is the word of God. So how do we understand these things? We remember that it is God’s word and I believe that God uses his word in such a way that the Holy Spirit will apply the word of the Apostle Paul, say, to a congregation, when a text from the Apostle Paul is preached, it goes beyond what even the Apostle Paul may have known at the time would have such an effect now.

Part III

---

In Light of Jesus’s Fulfillment of the Law, Are Christians Still Required to Keep the Mosaic Law? — Dr. Mohler Responds to Letters from Listeners to The Briefing

Okay, another very interesting question, and this one’s grounded in a situation I think we can all sort of see. So let’s see this. “Yesterday we had Christmas dinner with my in-laws and the conversation of the Law of Moses came up. I am of the belief that Jesus came to fulfill the law. My father-in-law says it’s blasphemy to say such a thing and that according to Jesus, we are to continue to uphold the law of Moses to this day. Can you clarify the above topic? By the way, he says that he was born and raised in the context of the Southern Baptist Convention. His father-in-law was born and raised a Catholic, but here’s what he says, he has gone in and out of multiple denominations and YouTubers throughout the last 10 years.”

Okay, we got the picture. We can see it now. So who is right? This man says that Christ came to fulfill the law and his father-in-law says it’s blasphemy to say such a thing and that according to Jesus, we are to continue to uphold the Law of Moses to this day. Okay. Well, I don’t like the way this is presented to me in terms of the fact I can’t be satisfied with the either or here, and I don’t think you should be either. So did Jesus come to fulfill the law? Well, not only did Jesus come to fulfill the law, he perfectly fulfilled the law. So in that sense, yes, that’s exactly right. Well, if you believe “I am of the belief that Jesus came to fulfill the law” then you are of the right belief because Jesus did come to do that and perfectly did that. We are now free from the law in that sense. Those who are in Christ are no longer under the condemnation of the law.

Okay. The father-in-law says that according to Jesus we are to continue to uphold the law of Moses to this day. Well, there we have to ask the question, is that right or wrong? And the answer is, yes, it’s right or wrong. That’s just to say it’s not exactly right and it’s not exactly wrong, but he is onto something here. So let me tell you what’s wrong about this or what’s not right about this because Jesus didn’t say that we are to continue to uphold the Law of Moses. And remember, the Law of Moses is more comprehensive than the moral law. It would also refer to the dietary law, it would refer to the calendar law, it would refer to the criminal and penal law. I’ll just say I don’t think that’s what the father-in-law is insisting on here. I think he’s more concerned with the moral law.

And I’ll simply say that in that sense, your father-in-law is correct. If what the younger man says, the son-in-law means, that Jesus came to fulfill the law, now we are under no law, okay, this is where I want to say to both the son-in-law and the father-in-law, Christ did perfectly fulfill the law. And we are saved only because Christ perfectly fulfilled the law. But we are not under no law. We are no longer under the Law of Moses, we are under the Law of Christ. And in the New Testament we have the recapitulation of the moral commands in such a way that there is no doubt that when Jesus said he came not to break but to fulfill the law, he has left for us no less a moral law.

But it is for us no longer merely a matter of the externals, but it is also a matter of internal allegiance and obedience to the law of Christ. So that’s the quick answer. If I have got to come between this son-in-law and this father-in-law, I want to make peace by pointing to the gospel of Jesus Christ in which Christ clearly is to be confessed and worshiped as the one who has perfectly fulfilled the Law. But we are now not under the Law of Moses in that sense, but we are not not under a law. We’re under the law of Christ and our obedience to that law is a matter of internal and not merely external accountability.

Part IV

---

Why Do We Not Sing More Hymns About the Incarnation Throughout the Year, Like We Do with the Resurrection? — Dr. Mohler Responds to Letters from Listeners to The Briefing

Okay, another question. A young man writes in, “Number one, why don’t we sing more Christmas music year round? We sing about the resurrection often, but why not Jesus’s arrival?” That’s a good question and there is no reason that Christmas music should be restricted to Christmas time. There is no reason that we should not sing even some of the music that’s most closely associated, say, with the Christmas celebration at other times of the year. It’s also clear that this listener is absolutely right, we should be singing praises to the one true and living God for the truth of the incarnation of the Lord Jesus Christ at all times.

But I also want to say there is more explicit reference to Christ and to the incarnation in much of the classic hymnody that is sung all throughout the Christian year. So I want to say even as the birth narrative may be missing from some of that hymnody, the incarnation is profoundly not missing if we’re singing the right hymns. 

One little footnote to that, by the way, the Christmas carol, as it is often designated, Joy to the World, I’m sure that has immediately come to your mind now, even as a tune traditionally associated with the hymn, that hymn was primarily written originally about the second coming of Christ, but is now sung as a Christmas carol. That is not an error, but it is an interesting historical point. And by the way, “joy to the world, the Lord is come” is true when we celebrate Christmas. It’s also true when we look forward to his coming again.

Part V

---

Can a Baby Fuss Without Sin? — Dr. Mohler Responds to Letter from a (Probably Sleep-Deprived) Listener to The Briefing

Okay, this same listener ask a second question, “Do we understand Christ’s holiness and perfection to imply he never fussed as a baby? Is fussing sinful?” 3

That’s a sweet question. I do not have a text or a verse to which I can refer you about a fussing Jesus. I can tell you that he became flesh and then became like us in every way yet without sin. So you ask me, “Can a baby fuss without sin?” I’m going to say I’m quite certain, and I don’t have chapter and verse on this, but I’m absolutely certain that a baby being a baby registering hunger, because the baby needs to be fed is not at all necessarily sinning in any way by, what is called here, fussing. We also understand that a line is crossed when that fussing becomes fussing. That’s a different matter. I don’t have chapter and verse, but I think anyone who’s ever raised a baby understands the difference between fussing and fussing.

Part VI

---

If Jesus was Born on Christmas, How Was He Around While Adam and Eve Lived? — Dr. Mohler Responds to a Letter from a 6-Year-Old Listener to The Briefing

Okay, the next question comes from a six-year-old boy through his father. The little boy ask, “If Jesus was born later in history, how was he around during Adam and Eve’s time?” The father says, “We’ve been talking about Christmas and Jesus’s birth and trying to help and understanding the Trinity of Jesus being eternal.” 

I think I know exactly what you mean here. I think the point is that we make very clear the pre-existence of Christ. We make very clear there never has been a time when Christ was not. We make very clear that the Son of God has been with the Father eternally.

But I think it’s also important that we make clear that at Christmas the Son of God becomes in a very real sense the Son of Man, that is to say he assumes human flesh. He is born as a baby in Bethlehem. That’s in space and time in history. There never was a time when the Son was not, but there is a time when Jesus was born. And those two things are just equally profoundly, eternally true. And as Christians, we believe both of them. And if a six-year-old boy has a struggle with that, well, it might be honest for us all to admit this is a larger truth, a more glorious truth than we can get our minds around. But we affirm everything the Scripture says and we praise God for everything he has revealed to us.

Part VII

---

How Should Christians Celebrate Christmas While Also Separating It From Any Pagan Origins? — Dr. Mohler Responds to Letters from Listeners to The Briefing

Okay, an honest question, and this comes from a student right here at Boyce College, and I’m going to take it. He asked this, “When talking about Christmas, many people talk about trees, origins, and how that is pagan rather than Christian. How did the two of those converge in history? What is our responsibility in separating the two now?” 

Okay, I love the question and we’re going to deal with it honestly, and we’re going to have to close with this one. But if a tree represents paganism to you, do not put it in your house. If a evergreen tree indicates pagan fertility rights to you, do not put it in your house. And we admit the historic association of those things, and there were pagans and even closer to us in Germany, in the forests of Thuringia, there were certainly druid-like religious patterns among people.

Boniface, the Catholics call him St. Boniface, the missionary to the Germanic tribes, he was confronted with a sacred tree, they claimed, and so famously, he took an ax and he cut it down. So much for your sacred tree. 

And by the way, in my office, I have a statue, I’m proud to possess, of Boniface, I’m not going to call him Saint Boniface, but of Boniface the evangelist cutting down a tree. And if a tree is being worshiped, brothers and sisters, cut it down. 

But I just want to be honest, and I want to say that even though we know there were pagan associations, and by the way, that’s true with many, many things, many, many things, and you see some of this even in the Old Testament, we do not associate, of course, any such pagan references. And those Pagan references are inseparable if they come to our mind, then again, don’t put the Christmas tree in your house.

But I think it’s also fair to say that most Christians who have Christmas trees in their homes have no idea of a pagan background or pagan associations, and thus, there is no paganism in having that tree in their house and decorating it for Christmas. There are Christmas trees on this campus, there’s a Christmas tree in our home, yet if I thought for a moment there were any pagan associations, what people thought of it, out would go the tree.