Ethics: Christmas Tree Vs. Fellowship

I put up a Christmas tree, but all Santas have been removed from my home because Santa seems to me to be Satan masquerading as a counterfeit Christ in this culture. I find Santa creepy. However, when I go into someone else's home and see a Santa, I do not feel the need to insist they get rid of it and I am not temped to bring Santas back into my home. I have recently met a brother who says he does not put up a Christmas tree in his home and have wondered if my tree will be a terrible offense to him. Reading the above comments makes me realize that unless he is tempted to "sin" against his conscience and put up a tree, there should be no problem with me putting up a tree, while he does not. I also agree that Jeremiah is not referring to Christmas trees. I also understand Druids worshipped evergreen trees in groves, but I do not worship trees in groves and I do not worship my Christmas tree. I also have stopped putting winged angel ornaments on my tree for various reasons, but again, I would not insist someone remove such things from their home and would not be tempted to bring them back into my home.

In light of his misappropriation of 1 Cor. 8, I'd start by making a deal with him: "I'll keep my Christmas tree un-put-up if you'll admit that you are a weaker brother." Then we'll see if he realizes he's stuck on the horns of a dilemma: if he can use that passage to pressure me to remove my tree, then he is admitting that he has a lot of "growing up" to do (and that if he weren't the weaker brother, someone else's tree would not be on his own conscience).

I would like to hear his biblical argument against Christmas trees. It most likely comes from Jeremiah 10, and it shouldn't be too difficult to show an open-minded person that the prophet is talking about carved idols representing pagan gods, not ornamental trees that represent only a festive season.

And if that doesn't work, then my last resort would be to point out that the English language predates the introduction of Christianity to England by a couple of centuries. Instead of speaking to me in the language of the druids, would he please henceforth address me only in Hebrew?

Best comment so far from twitter.

@hereiblog I ask him to please not speak English to me because of its pagan origins.

Jacob, thanks for your explanation. I've heard of folks who, when dealing with alcohol, believe Christians should never partake for fear of offense, etc. Funny how they stop at one issue though I agree with you. This attitude would bring us to the point that we could do nothing.

Larry, very clear point on the weaker brother. Love the pharisee point. :)

brig, hello old friend. LOL

Fletch, but then the library might send you a late fee.

I'd lose this guy like a library book.

I would either encourage him to seek counseling for his weakness, or maybe I'd say:

"Brother, I have seen the light. This tradition comes from those 19th century New England Episcopalians, right along with their baby sacrifices to Baal. And because I see that you are weak, and are tempted to worship this tree, I will put a cloth over it whenever you visit. Also, Episcopalians drink wine for the Lord's Supper, and drinking alcohol is an ancient Egyptian practice, and they celebrate *12* days of Christmas, just like ancient astrologers with their 12 signs of the zodiac. And rainbows, which some Christians say are a sign of a covenant with God, are really from the LBGT groups symbolizing solidarity in their sexual identities. Together we shall protest these affronts to our Savior, in spite of our anachronistic assumptions!"

Ask him to show you where in scripture Christmas trees are specifically forbidden. If (when) he is unable to do so, remind him that we dare not bind the consciences of of other believers where scripture does not. Assure him you will remain his friend and will fellowship with him despite your differences on this disputable area. I would then explain to him that the 'weaker brother' is someone who will be tempted to sin because of another's actions not merely someone who is offended by them or doesn't like them. Since he is not being tempted to either sin or to violate his conscience because of your actions, there is no need for you to bow to his personal convictions. If he persists, you may have to explain what a Pharisee is. :-)

I would explain to him that the text he is using isn't merely about offense but causing people to stumble. Stumbling is the idea of falling into an activity that a person considers sin. If a person sees drinking alcohol at all as a sin, and they are tempted to drink and my drinking in front of them leads them to then go ahead and drink too then I have caused them to stumble. The person who would never take a drink but simply thinks no one else should either because that is their conviction is not in danger of stumbling in the sense the passage is talking about. They are trying to enforce legalism, taking an extra-biblical conviction and making it the standard for all other believers. I think if we cave to such legalism we give sin our approval.

I would be willing to listen to his case against Christmas trees and give it consideration, but if my conscience is clear that it is not an act of idolatry then I don't think I'm bound to submit to his personal conviction sense it is not a clearly taught principle in Scripture. The logical extension of his reasoning is that we should all cease doing something forever if it offends anyone for any reason. If my playing tag with my kids is offensive to someone because they feel like running is not dignified before God, then I can never play tag with my kids again! This is not what the Scripture is teaching.