Jesus disappearing from Christmas as Santa takes over
Four in 10 Brits do not know that Jesus is a part of the Christmas story, a new poll has found.
The survey of 2,000 British adults found that many are clueless when it comes to other major figures from the birth of Jesus as well, with 37 per cent saying they did not know that Mary and Joseph were a part of the story.
Half (49 per cent) had no idea about the angel Gabriel's involvement yet six per cent thought Santa would make an appearance, according to the research for Hotels.com by OnePoll.
Asked what they thought the nativity story would look like if it were to happen today, one in 10 said they thought a unicorn would replace the donkey, 15 per cent said the three queens would replace the three kings - or Magi - and 10 per cent said Gabriel would appear to Mary via Instagram....
I don't think that CCM is designed to create an emotional response. It's too shallow. It's designed to make money. When presented as part of a worship service, too often the band is playing & singing while the congregation watches on silence. The Lord will dry any further tears once we reach heaven, which is enough to create an emotional response with the Lord Himself stooping to wipe my tear.
Affections and emotions are part of being human. Jesus wept, expressed anger, and stood his ground when challenged, all in His humanness. Worship should engage our emotions as we realize what a great and holy God we are meeting with and how unworthy we are to meet with Him. I too have been brought to the verge of tears by either the sermon or a hymn.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: John I am not trying to negate that people do stuff on an emotional whim or that your affections should not be set on things above. .. This topic is here because you implied songs shouldn’t produce emotions. I am saying and so is the author of your article, that if you are going to make a distinction between the two, those emotions come from the affections that are in people’s heart not just the words and music of the song. It was simply the wording and/or music in the song, all people would have the same response.
Yes I agree bro. But we both know plenty of examples where it IS either the wording or the music or both, that are designed especially to produce a response in the emotions only and not touch the affections.
The whole of the CCM movement depends typically on this fact. There is a psychology to all this, and it is to do with manipulation of the emotions. A marching army is taught certain types of songs specifically because they will affect the emotions. Soon after the singing stops, the effect stops. And I have met many charismatics who get withdrawal symptoms soon after the meeting ends.
I myself have sung hymns many times with tears, a momentary effect.
John I am not trying to negate that people do stuff on an emotional whim or that your affections should not be set on things above.
Emotion a natural instinctive state of mind deriving from one's circumstances, mood, or relationships with others.
Affection a gentle feeling of fondness or liking.
David said I was glad (an emotion not an affection) when they said unto me let us go into the house of the Lord. Now you may say it was his love for God and His people the produced that, but it was an emotional response. This topic is here because you implied songs shouldn’t produce emotions. I am saying and so is the author of your article, that if you are going to make a distinction between the two, those emotions come from the affections that are in people’s heart not just the words and music of the song. It was simply the wording and/or music in the song, all people would have the same response.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: John UK it seems much ado about nothing
Ah bro, check out any good Christian writer from any good Christian church, and see if they tell you not to live out of your emotions or feelings but your affections and truth. I'm surprised you didn't get some benefit from that short article.
Affections - Long-lasting Emotions - Fleeting
Affections - Deep Emotions - Superficial
Affections - Consistent with beliefs Emotions - Sometimes overpowering
Affections - Always results in action Emotions - Often fails to produce an action
Affections - Involve mind, will, feelings Emotions - Feelings (often) disconnected from the mind and will
I'm sure you know all this. For example:
You're going along just fine, and enjoying your Christian life, full of assurance and looking forward to heaven. But then you catch the Boston flu and are laid up. You get a distressing phone call from relatives, and your garden shed catches fire and explodes. Just at this point the devils attack and infiltrate your mind, filling it with such ungodly thoughts that you subjectively imagine you have lost your salvation, putting you in despair. BUT!!
Hello, Mr. JUK. I just want to apologize for using the phrase “false teaching”, which could connote you’re a false teacher and not saved. I knew the connotation it has when I said it and I do not have the information to make that judgement. I am sorry sir, that is a serious thing.
"one can rarely if ever experience an affection without it being emotional and involving intense feelings that awaken and move and stir the body"
As they seem to go hand in hand. Would you agree?
After much discussion in various threads on the subject of Psalm singing only, the number one complaint is that of “using the uninspired words of man”
Now if we consider the hymn, Great is Thy faithfulness
Great is Thy Faithfulness (Lam. 3:23) O God my Father (Matt 23:9) There is no shadow of turning with Thee (James 1:17} Thou changest not (Mal 3:6) Thy compassions they fail not (Lam. 3:22) As Thou hast been Thou forever wilt be (Heb 13:8)
Great is Thy Faithfulness(2x) ( Lam. 3:23) Morning by morning new mercies I see (Lam 3:23) All I have need Thy hand hath provided (Phil. 4:19) Great is Thy faithfulness, Lord unto me (Lam 323)
The words of the hymn are clearly those of inspired Scripture but somehow the hymn is not a worthy of praise to God because it is not in Psalms??
God inhabits the praise of His people even when their words sung don't come from Psalms.
Dr. Jim is not Dr. Tim wrote: You just contradicted yourself, sir. With one breath you say we must only sing the literal words of psalms, and then when pressed you say “it takes a lot of training” to be able to sing words that are not the literal word of God. For the well-being of weaker Christians, I kindly ask you to stop spreading false teaching.
Yes, they should be saying only in the original Hebrewâť—đź‘Ť
The BBC just reminded me several minutes ago that A Christmas Carol is exactly 175 years oldâť— Give this a look I believe it's reasonably accurate too.
https://youtu.be/_rbgQMtgxAU (Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol (1971 TV Special) [25 Minutes long]
B. McCausland wrote: If ever Xmass had a decent or valid religious practice and context in some time past, it's materialistic side has been powerfully hijacked by secularism and its profits to the point of no return as you say. It's perpetuation feeds and depends on the ongoing myth of the Santa guru, but needs the apeacing religious factor to navigate the compromise due to the substantial evangelical or nominal Christian contingent. Eventually, when society has become mainly atheistic, the celebration will return to its origins of a winter solstice festival, as Easter is intensingly becoming the spring celebration of life already in many European secularized countries. Of course, Santa will remain part of the myth as a substitute of deity, a false god that is ever-present, omniscient, a rewarder of practice and benefactor of the helpless. In short, this will remain that way because for the unbelieving the powerless Xmass babe 'cannot' render the same, or any relevant tangible 'good'. To the true believer however, the Christ of redemption will remain what has always been, the biblical sin bearer, separated from sinners.
Buckeyes wrote: (TMC)2/3rds of it is human invention
Scottish Metrical Version (SMV)
"In this our Enterprise we did only set God before our Eyes; and therefore weighed the Words and Sense of the Prophet, rather considering the Meaning thereof than what any Man had written. And chiefly being in this Place, where as most perfect and godly Judgement did assure us, and Exhortations to the same encourage us, we thought it better to frame the Rhyme to the Hebrew Sense, than binde the Sense to the English Meeter."
"The most important point about our Psalter is its faithfulness to the original Scripture. Unlike modern Psalters the SMV is not a paraphrase, but a translation. This is the case with all the Reformation Psalters. We have already noted the attitude of Knox and his associates to the translation of the Psalms. Consciously and deliberately our Reformed forefathers produced translations of the Psalms. The fact that they were translations into verse (or metre) does not mean paraphrase. What it does mean is contraction and dilation of Hebrew words and phrases."
"The preservation of the force of the Hebrew is the outstanding feature of our Psalter and the reason why we should prefer it above all others."
You just contradicted yourself, sir. With one breath you say we must only sing the literal words of psalms, and then when pressed you say “it takes a lot of training” to be able to sing words that are not the literal word of God. For the well-being of weaker Christians, I kindly ask you to stop spreading false teaching.
Buckeyes wrote: (TMC) So how do those who believe we must only sing God’s Words handle this very literal “adding to” of Scripture?
TMC, let me try.
Firstly, God in the NT exhorts us all to sing psalms.
So how do we go about this? How do you do it? Plainsong or chant or monotone? Or metrical psalms. It has to be done, we both agree on that.
Psalm 100 BOCP
O be joyful in the Lord, all ye lands: serve the Lord with gladness, and come before his presence with a song.
2. Be ye sure that the Lord he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture.
3. O go your way into his gates with thanksgiving, and into his courts with praise: be thankful unto him, and speak good of his Name.
4. For the Lord is gracious, his mercy is everlasting: and his truth endureth from generation to generation.
This is sung in the Anglican way, and it takes a lot of training to be able to accomplish it. But I would love for my fellow believers to be less slothful and learn it.
“All people that on earth do dwell, (0) Sing to the Lord with cheerful voice; (1-Lord) Him serve with mirth, his praise forth tell, (2- serve; with) Come ye before him and rejoice. (2- come; before)”
There are 112 words in the combined stanzas of “Psalm 100” from the Psalter - only 37 match what Psalm 100 actually says; which means that approx. 2/3rds of it is human invention. So how do those who believe we must only sing God’s Words handle this very literal “adding to” of Scripture?
Lurker wrote: About this Christmas business. It's not going to go away ... let the heathens take it over completely.
If ever Xmass had a decent or valid religious practice and context in some time past, it's materialistic side has been powerfully hijacked by secularism and its profits to the point of no return as you say.
It's perpetuation feeds and depends on the ongoing myth of the Santa guru, but needs the apeacing religious factor to navigate the compromise due to the substantial evangelical or nominal Christian contingent.
Eventually, when society has become mainly atheistic, the celebration will return to its origins of a winter solstice festival, as Easter is intensingly becoming the spring celebration of life already in many European secularized countries.
Of course, Santa will remain part of the myth as a substitute of deity, a false god that is ever-present, omniscient, a rewarder of practice and benefactor of the helpless. In short, this will remain that way because for the unbelieving the powerless Xmass babe 'cannot' render the same, or any relevant tangible 'good'.
To the true believer however, the Christ of redemption will remain what has always been, the biblical sin bearer, separated from sinners.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: Thanks John, will look at that the good Lord willing. Will hold my thoughts until I have time to read that, but will tell you upfront that emotions are God given and I am sure I can show you they are used in genuine worship of God. Be tomorrow before I can get to link. Thanks
For any Christians out there who are reading the posts of all these psalm only commanders (adding to the word of God), and questioning whether they may be right because there are so many of them and very adamant, just know that, yes, they are very wrong. It is highly illogical. Some may call it wiggity whack.
It's not going to go away out of our society so why fight against it?
Would anyone fly a rainbow flag in front of their house in commemoration of God's covenant with Noah? Of course not yet there are those who annually fight to keep Christ in the holiday just so they can argue against it. Seems rather pointless to me.
Call it Krismas (after Kris Kringle) and let the heathens take it over completely.
Dr. Steven J. Lawson | 12/6/2013
COMMENTS 
locked 
System Notice
