What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Is it okay to use the expression 'Xmas'?

jasonc said:
So the chi rho used by the rcc and used by mine is wrong .we hang that on our Christmas tree.america is very post Christianity . One nation under God really deserves a thread .because each person these days see God not very biblically

Christ is defined by these

The mormon ,the brother of Satan ,the son of god

The jw an archangel

The unity types ,a spirit ,a gnostic tradition.

So simply saying Christmas as all but the jw celebrate it doesn't do much.

My wife sees Christ very differently then me and believes In aliens .I told her trump may be a grufter but just because you or the media as some say he isn't the ac.if anything the way the Democrats redefine gender and support and promote the lbgt that is what the Bible says the ac will do
Click to expand...
I agree with all.
Except my JW friends tell me Jesus is God's Son.
But a created Son.
Because of that darn word BEGOTTEN.
Which does not exist in Italian...
here it's GENERATED, NOT MADE, ONE IN BEING WITH THE FATHER.
I wish we could get rid of that word.
Good night Jason.

Oh. And Aliens.
Yeah.
They're too intelligent to make contact with us!
:lol
 
My point was well look at symbols of the Trinity ,often now associated with led Zeppelin.

The chi rho isn't wrong . When you have a culture that is far removed sometimes simple symbols won't be enough or the name . When chi was used the local church was the center of community .

The city of Savannah has that preserved well enough to make a point if you visit the old part . I just don't think using x is wrong .

Wasilling is what ?
And my town has mcansh park that actually does it .we call it carrolling.outside of that I know of no one who has neighbors who walk around singing carrols and lighting candles.and not all actually believe in Christ there .
 
wondering said:
just think it's nasty to take Christ out of Christmas.
Click to expand...
I am happy inhouse to abbreviate to Xmas (etc), but I do so without removing Christ. [Xmas] functions differently outside of Church, where it functions, sadly, as a Christ-removal. One person's use is another's abuse. PS: at times the NT used abbreviations for deific nouns.
 
Vinny37 said:
I am happy inhouse to abbreviate to Xmas (etc), but I do so without removing Christ. [Xmas] functions differently outside of Church, where it functions, sadly, as a Christ-removal. One person's use is another's abuse. PS: at times the NT used abbreviations for deific nouns.
Click to expand...
I could agree with this, but I just never do it.
Can't think of any NT abbreviations....?

Also, could you comment on covenants please?
Mentioned you in a post just now.
Thanks.
 
Tbh I think there are far bigger concerns than the fact that Christmas is practiced outside of Christianity. Nor do I think most people care enough to actively "take Christ out" of the name. The vast majority of non-Christians still say "Christmas". "X-mas" is almost entirely just used as an abbreviation.

That's my opinion, anyway.
 
wondering said:
I could agree with this, but I just never do it.
Can't think of any NT abbreviations....?

Also, could you comment on covenants please?
Mentioned you in a post just now.
Thanks.
Click to expand...
The UNCIAL text often abbreviated [God] and [Jesus] (James White's The King James Only Controversy, 1995:207-9; https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/encyclopedia-of-the-bible/Text-Manuscripts-New-Testament). Eg, if in 1 Tm.3:16, ΘΕΟΣ would have been written as ΘΣ, with a line above covering both letters. White suspected that an early scribe mistakenly copied such as ΟΣ (he)—easily done on a busy day from a cluttered text without spaces! Hence did the text say [God], or [he]?

On covenants, see such as Israel's Gone Global (Steve Hakes). But in rough, Sinai, no longer active, was not given to the church. Thus we do not do physical circumcision as a way to obey Yahweh. However, Sinai also incorporated global imperatives, so we still do [don't murder], separating the non-Sinai specific, from the global. Further, we see global attitudes (occultism remains wrong), detached by Christ from Sinai responses (execution).
 
Vinny37 said:
The UNCIAL text often abbreviated [God] and [Jesus] (James White's The King James Only Controversy, 1995:207-9; https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/encyclopedia-of-the-bible/Text-Manuscripts-New-Testament). Eg, if in 1 Tm.3:16, ΘΕΟΣ would have been written as ΘΣ, with a line above covering both letters. White suspected that an early scribe mistakenly copied such as ΟΣ (he)—easily done on a busy day from a cluttered text without spaces! Hence did the text say [God], or [he]?
Click to expand...
Many such instances in the NT, at least, but none that affect doctrine.
I don't think it makes a difference if it states HE or GOD.
It's speaking about God (1 Tim 3:16), Jesus.
But Jesus was revealed in the flesh...
and so was God.
Taken up in glory shows the subject is Jesus...
I'm good with either.

Vinny37 said:
On covenants, see such as Israel's Gone Global (Steve Hakes). But in rough, Sinai, no longer active, was not given to the church. Thus we do not do physical circumcision as a way to obey Yahweh. However, Sinai also incorporated global imperatives, so we still do [don't murder], separating the non-Sinai specific, from the global. Further, we see global attitudes (occultism remains wrong), detached by Christ from Sinai responses (execution).
Click to expand...
No covenant replaces the previous, but it changes it in some way and makes it better or more extensive.
The New Covenant replaced ALL previous covenants by making a change that could not be improved upon...
and so Covenants ended. The New and Eternal Covenant.
But even this one kept some old concepts and I shouldn't have used the word REPLACED, but my time here is limited and I make such mistakes at times.

I must say, you're the only calvinist I can speak to with any amount of intelligence (on my part).
Usually it boils down to silly arguments and downright insults at times.

But you've missed my point about the Covenants.

The Edenic and Mosaic Covenants are:
BILATERAL - both sides must agree, God and man
CONDITIONAL - both sides have conditions that must be kept.

My question is: IF a condition must be kept (usually obedience) doesn't that mean that man has free will?
I'd like not to debate what free will is as with Roger.
Free will: The ability to choose between 2 moral options with outside influences, but without outside coercion.

How does God make a covenant with man and tell man that God will keep His part of the deal, but man must keep his part of the deal IF GOD PREDETERMINED whether or not man will keep his part??

This is a question that really interests me.
So far no reply.
Maybe the reformed have no reply.
Are the reformed encouraged to study the covenants?
 
wondering said:
Could you post some support please?
I've never heard of this and it seems unlikely to me.
Click to expand...
Though the two letters look like P and X in the English alphabet, they are actually chi (looks like X) and rho (looks like P) from the Greek alphabet. They also happen to be the first two letters of “Christ” in Greek (Christos). Hence the chi-rho monogram is used as a symbol of Christ, Christianity, and Christians.
 
Michaelmas
Candlemas
Christmass
Are liturgical celebrations
Thanks
 
donadams said:
Though the two letters look like P and X in the English alphabet, they are actually chi (looks like X) and rho (looks like P) from the Greek alphabet. They also happen to be the first two letters of “Christ” in Greek (Christos). Hence the chi-rho monogram is used as a symbol of Christ, Christianity, and Christians.
Click to expand...
Support means something written so I could read it.
The above doesn't say enough...
 
Well there is the Hashem and it's substitution of the YHWH and or Lord ,kyrios which well the later is a translation of Adonai but has master slave connotations which doesn't really give proper understanding of God ,albeit Minor
 
jasonc said:
Well there is the Hashem and it's substitution of the YHWH and or Lord ,kyrios which well the later is a translation of Adonai but has master slave connotations which doesn't really give proper understanding of God ,albeit Minor
Click to expand...
In the Covenants we also have relationship titles:
King - Servant
Sovereign - Vassel
 
wondering said:
In the Covenants we also have relationship titles:
King - Servant
Sovereign - Vassel
Click to expand...
Yes but the actually Jewish view of the name ,
Moses asked God for his Name ,that is actually a bit lengthy .it's more then a title ,it's I am everything you need.a king ,a father ,a shepherd ,your shield ,your protector ,your provision in one word .and all we say is Lord.in jewry they are taught that above all else and refuse to even spell the Name and say Heshem or if spelling G-D or write any other name but the YHWH. They will use Hashem the most and avoid saying the other names Adonai,El Shaddai, Elohim.
 
It is not okay to use the term 'Xmas' on here or for any church's messages. That's like telling everyone that you are a Xtian and you worship X. It is anti-Christ.
 
evenifigoalone said:
I've typed "Xtian" on sites with limited characters such as Twitter.
Click to expand...
Yes there's a reduction of church goers and believers in the past decades or so. And it may continue to be so.

There are fewer people reading and buy Christian books at bookstores as well. All these are due to the popularity of social media.

It is up to your own prerogative whether what you want to use. I am not a pastor nor studying to be one but personally, I won't use a word like "Xtian".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top