Stringer/Bunch Debate on Christmas

 
 
 Proposition: 
 The Christian may celebrate December 25th as a 
 national holiday.
 
 Affirm:  Larry Bunch
 Deny:  Jason Stringer
 
 Greetings from Waco, Texas.  
 
 This being the last installment of this discussion I want to say 
 a few things first and then move into what Larry said in his last 
 installment.  First I want to thank bro. Clark for his 
 establishing this list for us for such discussions.  I harbor no 
 ill-feelings toward Larry, and hope that nothing I said indicates 
 such.  Larry is entitled to his opinion on this matter as am I, 
 and as brethren we need to discuss such things and come to a 
 better knowledge of such subjects.  In about a month Larry and I 
 will be discussing propositions regarding marriage, divorce and 
 remarriage, and I look forward to that also.
 
 Now, enough of the chitter chatter, let's get down to the brass 
 tacks of it all.
 
 Larry and I are discussing the following:
 
 "The Christian may celebrate December 25th as a national 
 holiday."
 Affirm: Larry A. Bunch
 Deny: Jason Stringer
 
 The whole debate comes down to this, something that Larry has 
 never really dealt with the entire discussion:  Why was this 
 holiday created?  What do most people associate this holiday 
 with?  What is the Christian's responsibility toward such 
 matters?
 
 Let's look at Larry's answers to my last negative:
 
 Larry wrote 
 While it is true December 25th was set aside as a national 
 holiday, I cannot say whether it was set aside because it was 
 viewed as the "birthday of Christ" or because families got 
 together at this time of year.
 
 JES Here:
 Why do families get together that time of year?  Go back to the 
 origin of the Holiday when it became known as Xmas.  All of it 
 stems back to man's misguided attempts to celebrate something 
 that God wants them taking no part in.
 
 Then Larry writes:  
 "I really fail to understand why Jason cannot see that folks 
 celebrate this time of the year as a time of family get-togethers 
 and a national holiday without inserting the birth of Christ into 
 it. 
 
 JES Here: 
 I "see" how folks celebrate this time of year as such, but my 
 question is WHY? (Emphasis)  What is so special about this time 
 of year for folks to celebrate their family, etc.?  It's so 
 special because when the holiday was established it was done so 
 because it was/is celebrated as the birth of Christ.  Something 
 Christ wants us to have no part in celebrating.
 
 Then Larry writes: 
 "Folks seeing my winter/seasonal decorations need not assume I am 
 celebrating the birth of Christ because of lights, Rudolph, Santa 
 and things of the kind any more than seeing these same things in 
 the yard of the atheist and Jew causes one to make the same 
 assumption."
 
 JES Here: 
 So now they are "winter/seasonal" decorations?  The point is, 
 Larry et al,that others DO assume you're celebrating right along 
 with them.  I have tried to point this out in every way I know 
 how, and the point just doesn't seem to get across.  Does 
 everyone who passes your house KNOW that you don't attach 
 religious significance to this holiday?  
 
 Then Larry goes on and says:  
 "A silent nod? I have given considerable attention to your 
 misunderstanding of signs and symbols."
 
 JES Here: 
 What Larry is doing is giving a "silent nod" to those who 
 celebrate this holiday in a religious manner.  Further his 
 "considerable attention" has consisted of about 8 sentences 
 throughout this discussion.  When one drives down the road and 
 sees a bright red horse with wings on the side of a gas station, 
 what does that indicate?  Mobil.  A large tiger?  Exxon.  A star 
 with a T in the center?  Texaco.  A big yellow shell?  Shell Oil.  
 A house with Frosty the Snowman, Rudolph, and Santa?  A 
 celebration of Xmas.  
 
 Then Larry writes:  
 "Mr. Average Citizen doesn't think any such thing as indicated 
 above. He might think, "Wonder why the preacher doesn't put up 
 any religious scenes?" Inquiry into this question would reveal, 
 to those who do not already know, that the preacher doesn't 
 celebrate Xmas as a religious holiday. Good teaching tool!"
 
 JES Here: 
 I want to thank Larry at this juncture for making my point in 
 such a great manner!  A TEACHING TOOL!  Mr. Average citizen who 
 sees NOTHING of the season in your front yard is going to be even 
 more inquisitive.  Think about that lady at the bank you 
 mentioned, Larry.  She probably would have been even more curious 
 a long time ago, and would have inquired a lot sooner, giving you 
 a better opportunity to teach her!  Thanks again for making my 
 point.
 
 Then Larry writes:  
 "And people know I do not celebrate Xmas as a religious holiday."
 
 JES Here: 
 Prove it, Larry.  I gave you the evidence that shows people I 
 don't go out and carouse as they do on July 4, yet you put up the 
 trappings of evidence all over your yard and home to show people 
 that you do the same thing they do on this holiday.
 
 Then Larry writes: 
 "No, Jason, you couldn't wear the ring as long as you knew.. 
 There is no parallel to wearing the ring and putting up Rudolph 
 in the front yard. As the saying is, you are comparing apples and 
 oranges. The only comparison that could properly be made is 
 wearing the ring and putting up a manger scene!"
 
 JES Here: 
 Sounds like apples and apples to me, Larry.  Rudolph (a 
 promotional gimmick by Montgomery-Ward) was designed to get 
 people to spend more money on this holiday that originated 
 because of false religion.  People associate the Red Nosed 
 Reindeer with Xmas.  Xmas is associated with the birth of Christ.  
 It goes in a circle Larry.  I do wear a ring on my finger that is 
 a class ring from Stephen F. Austin State University.  It's a 
 symbol of that school and the education I received there.  When 
 people see it, they associate me with SFA.  When people see 
 Rudolph they associate him with Xmas.  When most people think 
 Xmas, they think birth of Christ.
 
 Then Larry proposes:  
 "I in no way compromise my influence by putting up decorations of 
 Rudolph or Santa! In fact, actually the very opposite might be 
 true, IF folks think Rudolph and Santa are indications of a 
 religious observance of Xmas (I deny that the mere presence of 
 such decorations necessarily demands one places a religious 
 connotation on the observance of the holiday), what harm has that 
 done me?"
 
 JES Here: 
 I had to read this twice in order to believe what I was seeing.  
 Now Larry wants people to think he's observing it in a religious 
 manner?  What HARM has that done you, Larry?  I'll tell you the 
 harm:  People think you're joining right in with them in their 
 celebration.  Today is the day commonly known as Mardi Gras.  If 
 I went somewhere today wearing a bunch of beads and allowed 
 people to think I was participating in that debauchery, what 
 would be the HARM?  Maybe I just like beads.
 
 Larry goes on in this same paragraph and writes:  
 "maybe my influence was hurt because of the ABSENCE of religious 
 decorations!"
 
 JES Here: 
 Once again I had to read this twice.  The absence of any 
 decoration caused this lady to ask a question that made her THINK 
 about her practice and the practice of others.  She would have 
 never asked had you had anything in your yard.  How many lost 
 opportunities to spread the INFLUENCE OF THE GOSPEL to people 
 such as her have you missed by having decorations in your yard, 
 Larry?  Think hard about that one, because you'll have to account 
 for it on the judgment day.
 
 Larry then writes:  
 "This borders on the ludicrous extreme! If I felt that deeply 
 about the matter, I don't think I could even work to influence 
 sales associated with the holiday!"
 
 JES Here: 
 He goes on in this to accuse me of "phariseeism".  As far as 
 influencing sales associated with this holiday, I am in the store 
 everyday.  I influence sales on a daily basis.  I do nothing 
 different whether it's December or May.  I follow my bosses 
 instructions, and that's that.  
 
 Larry writes:  
 "No, I am a Christian." To which Grover replied, "I'm a Christian 
 too, but that doesn't make me a fool!" "nuff said on that!""
 
 JES Here: 
 Larry, if you're ever in Waco, stop by for a cup of coffee.  I 
 have a coffee pot and a big can of Folgers.  Also have cream and 
 sugar.  Point being this, Larry:  No one out there, that I know 
 of anyway, attaches religious significance to drinking coffee.  
 However, a lot of people attach religious significance to putting 
 idols to Rudolph and Santa in your front yard.  Personally, if 
 not decorating up for the holidays and participating in the 
 revelry that goes on during that time makes me a fool, then I 
 suppose I am a "fool for Christ's sake."
 
 Larry concludes by saying:  
 "Objections to brethren celebrating Xmas fall in the extremist 
 realm that other things fall in - such as No Bible Classes, 
 Single Container for the Lord's Supper, Wearing a Doily on 
 Women's Heads, etc. "
 
 JES Here: 
 I suppose that the Lord was an extremist.  He went in with whips 
 and cleansed the Temple.  He demanded obedience to His will.  He 
 demanded that we keep our lives pure and clean and follow His 
 word.  He demanded that we be a "peculiar people".  He demanded 
 that we "transform ourselves" from this world.  You can't justify 
 your actions by name-calling, Larry.  You have to justify them by 
 the scripture, which you have yet to do, and now the debate is 
 concluded. (Although technically in formal debating the 
 affirmative does get the last word, so if you want to post a 
 short rebuttal I have no objections, if the moderators of the 
 list don't either).
 
 Conclusion: 
 Do you want to compromise your influence in such a manner?  Do 
 you want people to think that you celebrate this holiday in the 
 same way they do?  How many could you have reached had you not 
 put decorations up and celebrated this "national holiday"?  I'm 
 sorry, Larry, my soul's too important to me to compromise in such 
 a manner.
 
 Brotherly,
 
 Jason Stringer