THE MEANING OF CHRISTMAS- “Good Will Toward Men”
In our secularized culture, non-Christians have reinterpreted the “true meaning of Christmas” to be “good will toward men.” By that expression they mean that people should get along with one another, have good feelings toward one another, and be nice to one another. It is this humanistic interpretation of Christmas that is celebrated in such holiday films as It’s a Wonderful Life and White Christmas.

THE MEANING OF CHRISTMAS- Human Longing for Love
Not to appreciate the human longing for love, happiness, and goodness expressed in these films would be dreadful indeed. Human beings, Christians and non-Christians alike, have a tremendous capacity for feeling, and Christmas brings that capacity to open expression with an intensity unmatched the rest of the year. Rather than condemning these expressions of human emotion, Christians ought to acknowledge them and feel free even to enjoy and participate in them.

THE MEANING OF CHRISTMAS- The True Meaning of Christmas
But Christians should also recognize, and help non-Christians to see as well, that the true meaning of Christmas lies elsewhere. When the angels announcing Christ’s birth sang about “good will toward men” [Luke 2:14], they were not singing about people showing good will toward other people, but about God showing good will toward men. The point is that in Christmas God acted in a magnificent way to show goodness and love toward us. By becoming a human being, dying on the cross for our sins, and rising from the dead, Jesus Christ overcame for us sin and the grave. In short, Jesus was born to overcome the very things that left unchecked would destroy the human spirit of love, tenderness, and selflessness celebrated by secularists at Christmas. Because Jesus Christ came to earth in Bethlehem, it’s a wonderful life both now and forever for those who believe in Him and through Him experience God’s good will toward them. On the true meaning of Christmas, that’s the CRI perspective. I’m Hank Hanegraaff.

CHRISTMAS PRESENTS- Origins
The giving of gifts at Christmas is a custom which developed in imitation of the wise men, or Magi, who gave gifts to Christ [Matt. 2:11]. It is sometimes said, notably by the Jehovah’s Witnesses, that this biblical event is irrelevant to Christmas gift-giving. For one thing, they claim, the word “Magi” should be translated “astrologers,” and clearly God would not lead people to Christ through astrology. This claim is at best a half-truth: the Magi were trained not only in astrology but also in all of the arts and sciences of their culture, so that the translation “wise men” is actually much more accurate than “astrologers.” Besides, the Bible makes it very clear that the wise men were led by God, both by the star which led them to Christ [Matt. 2:9], and by the warning which they received in a dream not to go back to Herod, since it was given to protect Christ’s life [Matt. 2:11].

CHRISTMAS PRESENTS- Misunderstandings
Jehovah’s Witnesses also point out that the wise men gave gifts to Christ, and they did not give gifts to one another. But that misses the point altogether. The now risen, glorified Jesus doesn’t need anything in the first place; but if we give to others Jesus Christ considers that as good as giving to Him [Matt. 25:31-46].

CHRISTMAS PRESENTS- The Commercialism Behind the Gift
For most people the really troublesome aspects of Christmas gift-giving is the commercialism attached to it and the pressure it often puts on people to give gifts to people because it’s expected rather than freely given out of love. And you know, all of us can identify with that. But these are abuses and therefore do not invalidate the practice itself. What you ought to do is adopt sensible, biblically-based principles to guide your giving, and stick to them. Whatever you decide to give, give cheerfully, and use Christmas gifts to remind yourself and your loved ones of Jesus Christ, God’s incomparable gift to us. On Christmas gift-giving, that’s the CRI perspective. I’m Hank Hanegraaff.

ARE CHRISTMAS TREES IDOLATROUS?- Christmas Trees in Jeremiah?
Sometimes it is said that Christmas trees are condemned in Jeremiah 10, verses 2 – 4, where God says, “the customs of the peoples are delusion, because it is wood cut from the forest, the work of the hands of a craftsman with a cutting tool. They decorate it with silver and gold, they fasten it with nails and a hammer so that it will not totter.”

ARE CHRISTMAS TREES IDOLATROUS?- The Reality
Although this may sound like a reference to Christmas trees, it really is not. In this passage God is condemning idols which are carved out of wood and used as objects of worship; thus, in the very next verse God ridicules the idols because they cannot talk and cannot walk! Obviously, this criticism is not aimed at Christmas trees at all.

ARE CHRISTMAS TREES IDOLATROUS?- The Real Origin of Christmas Trees
The fact of the matter is that the Christmas tree originated in Christian Germany about two thousand years after Jeremiah’s criticisms of wooden idols. It originated from two Christian symbols found in homes at Christmas time. The first was a “Paradise tree,” an evergreen which was hung with apples which represented the tree of life in the Garden of Eden. The second symbol was a “Christmas pyramid.” This of course was a triangular shelf holding Christmas figurines and decorated with a star. By about the 16th century these two symbols had been combined into the Christian Christmas tree.

ARE CHRISTMAS TREES IDOLATROUS?- Conclusion
Thus, the Christmas tree is a thoroughly Christian symbol, and Christians ought not to feel guilty for having one of them in their home. On the other hand, the Christmas tree is not essential to Christmas, and Christians may, of course, do without it if they choose to. If you see a Christmas tree in the home of a non-Christian friend or a relative, you might take the opportunity to point to it as the symbol of the fact that Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem so that they might have eternal life. On Christmas trees, that’s the CRI perspective. I’m Hank Hanegraaff.

SANTA CLAUS- A Nonessential
Santa Claus is not essential or even very important to Christmas. I mean you can take Santa out of Christmas and Christmas remains intact. However, you cannot take Christ out of Christmas, because all that you would have left is a pagan festival. So, whatever else we might say about Santa Claus, let’s remember that he is not what Christmas is all about.

SANTA CLAUS- The Man
Now, while Santa Claus in its present form is a fairy tale, there really was a Santa Claus. His name, “Santa Claus” is an Anglicized form of the Dutch Sinter Klaas, which in turn means “Saint Nicholas.” Nicholas was a Christian bishop in the fourth century who apparently attended the Council of Nicea and supported the doctrine of the Trinity. The tradition that he was especially kind toward children, even giving them gifts, is very likely based on fact. Thus Christians might justifiably look to the real Saint Nicholas as a hero of the Christian faith.

SANTA CLAUS- The Myth
Of course, the story that Santa Claus lives at the North Pole in a toy factory, that he sees children at all times and knows whether they’ve been bad or good, and that he flies in a sled pulled by flying reindeer, is of course, a myth and should be treated as such. Christian parents can take two approaches to this Santa Claus story. As a make-believe story with a moral they can tell their small children the parts of the story that are harmless (such as the flying reindeer) and reject the other parts that are objectionable (such as Santa being all-knowing, or Santa being omniscient). Or parents can reject the whole story and have absolutely nothing to do with it. In any case, Christians should not allow Santa Claus to eclipse Christ as the reason for the season. On Santa Claus, that’s the CRI Perspective. I’m Hank Hanegraaff.

THE CHRISTIAN AND CHRISTMAS- Pagan Myths and Practices
The best arguments against Christmas are the pagan myths and practices that have attached themselves like so many barnacles to a ship. But just as you don’t abandon a ship simply because it’s got some barnacles on it, you don’t need to abandon Christmas because non-Christians abuse it.

THE CHRISTIAN AND CHRISTMAS- No Violation of Biblical Principles
The Bible neither commands nor condemns Christmas. Nor is there any biblical principle violated by the celebration of Christ’s birthday. Scripture clearly teaches that anything is permitted as long as it does not violate biblical principles, and as long as it is done in faith, with love, and in a manner that edifies (Rom. 13:10; 14:4-5, 23; 1 Cor. 6:12; 10:23; Col. 2:20-22).

THE CHRISTIAN AND CHRISTMAS- What Day WAS Jesus Born on?
Often we are told that celebrating Christ’s birthday on December 25th is very wrong, for two reasons. The first is that Christ was probably not even born on December 25th. That’s probably true, but so what? We don’t know on what day Jesus Christ was actually born, but what does it really matter? What matters is that we are commemorating the birth of the Savior of the world.

THE CHRISTIAN AND CHRISTMAS- Pagan Festivals
The second objection is more weighty — when Christmas was originally instituted, December 25th was a pagan festival which commemorated the birthday of a false god. While this is a historical fact, what is often overlooked by the church is its intent in choosing December 25th in the first place. The church was not Christianizing a pagan festival, but was establishing the celebration of the birth of Christ as a rival celebration. Today the world has all but forgotten about the pagan gods of Greece and Rome, but at least a billion people on planet earth today consider themselves to be followers of Jesus Christ.

THE CHRISTIAN AND CHRISTMAS- Conclusion
Well, over the next few days I’m going to be discussing what Christians should think of such traditional aspects of Christmas as Santa Claus and Christmas trees. But remember, there is nothing wrong with celebrating the birth of the Savior of the world, I think it’s great. On Christmas, that’s the CRI perspective. I’m Hank Hanegraaff.

THE CANAANITES- Degenerates
Some find it hard to understand why God would use Israel as his instrument to annihilate an entire race of people like the Canaanites. Why did he? The answer is simply this. The nations which Israel destroyed had degenerated dramatically. In fact, archaeologists have given us a glimpse of how evil the inhabitants of Palestine had actually become. They were involved in bestiality, incest, molestation, homosexuality, prostitution — and if that’s not enough, they even sacrificed their children to idols. In fact, the entire land had become so contaminated that God, who truly sees the big picture, decided for the good of mankind that they had to be destroyed.

THE CANAANITES- No Argument from Ignorance
And let’s not forget that the Canaanites and Amelikites couldn’t claim they didn’t know any better. They were fully aware that God had chosen Israel to be a tool in His hands in bringing judgement to the nations.

THE CANAANITES- God’s Justness in Perspective
It’s clear from history, God gave them ample time to repent, but they refused (Gen. 15:16; Deut. 7:22). And as a consequence, God used Israel to bring judgement upon them. And lest anyone accuse God of being unfair, there is ample Biblical evidence that if there were any righteous in the land, God would have spared them just like He spared Rahab when Jericho was destroyed (Josh. 6:25 df. Gen. 18:22f; Num. 31:35).

THE CANAANITES- Are All Killings Murder?
Now let me make one more point. While murder is a direct violation of the sixth commandment, not all forms of killing represent murder. To kill someone in self-defense or to execute someone for a capitol offense is justifiable. The fact is, justice demands that war criminals like the Nazis be put to death. As scholar Walter Kaiser puts it, war is “God’s ultimate, but reluctant, method of treating gross evil that resists every other patient and loving rebuke of God.” (Toward Old Testament Ethics, 1983:178).

THE CANAANITES- Conclusion
On the question of God’s justice in light of His command to wipe out the Canaanites (and the Amelekites), that’s the CRI Perspective. I’m Hank Hanegraaff.

PENTECOST- The Darkened Sun
Matthew, Mark, and even Luke all mention that the sun became dark at Christ’s crucifixion [Matt. 27:45; Mark 15:33; Luke 23:44-45]. This doesn’t mean that the sun ceased to give light. Nor did it refer to an eclipse of the sun by the moon. Rather, it was probably caused by a dust storm.

PENTECOST- The Lunar Eclipse
But the real question is, was Peter actually referring to this darkening of the sun when he quoted Joel? Interestingly enough, until recently the reference to the moon turning to blood seemed to indicate otherwise. However, now, beyond reasonable doubt, we know that the moon did “turn to blood” and it was on the very day that Christ died. You see, in ancient idiom the “moon turning to blood” was a reference to the moon turning blood-red during a lunar eclipse. And now scientists have discovered that a lunar eclipse occurred and was visible from Jerusalem on Friday, April 3, A.D. 33. Incidentally, this day was a Passover, and on independent examination it’s the most likely date of the Crucifixion.

PENTECOST- Intensified by the Dust Storm
Not only this, but a dust storm in the afternoon (especially one that would have obscured the sun’s light) would also have intensified the reddening effect of the lunar eclipse, making the blood-red coloring of the moon even more dramatic.

PENTECOST- Fulfillment of OT Prophecy
In and of themselves, a dust storm and a lunar eclipse are not overtly supernatural. However, the fact that they happened on the very same day — the day of Christ’s death — provides powerful evidence that Christ’s death was, as the Gospel writers clearly claimed, a fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. For all these reasons and more, we can conclude that Peter was right in claiming that Joels’ prophecy had been fulfilled in his day.

PENTECOST- Conclusion
Interesting isn’t it? The more we learn the more we understand how incredibly reliable the Bible and Biblical prophecy really are. Well, did the Sun go dark and did the moon turn to blood in Peters’ day? The verdict is yes! That’s the CRI Perspective. I’m Hank Hanegraaff.

JESUS IS NOT GOD?!- John 5:19
Ironically John 5:19, in reality is a powerful proof text that confirms Jesus Christ is, in fact, God. As always, a text without a context is a pretext, so let’s look at the whole verse: He says, “Truly, truly I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner” (John 5:19, NASB). Now, here Jesus makes some pretty strategic points. First, the Son does nothing independently of the Father. This is exactly what the doctrine of the Trinity teaches. The Trinity is not three separate Gods, working independently of one another; it is one God, with the Son doing nothing except in perfect union with the Father.

JESUS IS NOT GOD?!- Nothing that the Father wouldn’t Do
In addition, John 5:19 clearly states that the Son cannot do anything that the Father wouldn’t do. This is incredible, for if Jesus can’t do anything that God wouldn’t do, then Jesus can’t sin. Notice Jesus didn’t say, “He shouldn’t,” or “He didn’t,” He said he couldn’t. This, my friend, is empirical proof. And if Jesus could not sin, that proves He was no mere human being. In fact, it implies that Jesus Christ was theo-anthropos — fully God and fully man.

JESUS IS NOT GOD?!- Finally…
Now finally notice this, the text says that the Son does everything the Father does. Again, this is amazing. “Like Father, like Son” — that’s precisely the point, everything God does, Jesus does. Think about it. If Jesus does everything God does, and only what God does, then doesn’t that make Jesus God? If Jesus does everything that the Father does, how can Jesus Christ be less than God?

JESUS IS NOT GOD?!- Conclusion
So you see, far from disproving the Deity of Christ, John 5:19 is one of the most powerful proof texts for His deity. On John 5:19, that’s the CRI Perspective. I’m Hank Hanegraaff.

THE SIGN OF JONAH- Seeming Contradictions
Consider these two sentences: “In America, there is no king.” “In America, everyone is king.” From a verbal standpoint on a superficial level, these two sentences are contradictory, but are they really? On closer examination it becomes clear that they really mean exactly the same thing. In America, there is no one person who is king over everyone else, because in America people govern themselves.

THE SIGN OF JONAH- Easy to Explain
Many alleged biblical contradictions are just as easy to explain. When Mark reports Jesus as saying that there would be no sign, and Matthew reports Jesus as saying that there would be no sign except His resurrection, the contradiction is in fact only an apparent contradiction and that only on a superficial level.

THE SIGN OF JONAH- Matthew’s Exception
The first thing that ought to be remembered is that, in both Matthew and Mark, Jesus says, “No sign will be given.” Matthew, of course, adds “except for the sign of Jonah,” or the sign of the resurrection. All he’s doing is giving us more complete detail — talk about straining at gnats! And don’t forget the context.

THE SIGN OF JONAH- The Real Meaning
What the Pharisees are asking Jesus to do is to produce a “sign-on-demand” at their beck and call. In both Matthew and Mark it is clear that Jesus was saying, “Forget it!” Now while Mark simply reports Jesus saying, in effect, “You’re not going to get the kind of sign you’re demanding,” Matthew adds, “You will get a sign, the sign of the resurrection.” Well there is really no contradiction whatsoever.

THE SIGN OF JONAH- The Honest Skeptic
The Bible is consistent, but it does not fit the standards of consistency demanded by those who only want to find fault with it. If you really want to find fault, I suppose you could always find a way, but if you’re an honest skeptic who is sincerely searching for truth, I guarantee one day, after close consideration, you will (as I do) bow in humble adoration to the majesty of both God and His word.

THE SIGN OF JONAH- Conclusion
You see, how is it possible for 40 men to write on hundreds of different subjects over 1600 years in different languages and on different continents with one central story without contradiction? That’s the real question.Did Jesus give a sign? Yes and no. That’s the CRI Perspective. I’m Hank Hanegraaff.

THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS- The Facts
Let’s look at the record. Jesus died on a Friday afternoon and rose from the dead early Sunday morning. The inescapable conclusion is that Jesus was literally dead for only two nights and parts of three days — no more than about 40 hours.

THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS- Making a Bigger Problem
On the surface, this seems to contradict Jesus’ statement in Matthew 12:40 that He would be dead “three days and three nights.” To deal with the problem some Christians have created a bigger problem, they’ve concluded Jesus died on Thursday and rose on Sunday, or died on Wednesday and rose on Saturday. However, there is virtually no possibility of this view fitting what the Gospels really say. The Gospels agree that Jesus died and was buried late on the day before the Sabbath — that is, on Friday — and rose on the day after the Sabbath, or on Sunday [Matt. 27:62; 28:1; Mark 15:42; 16:1; Luke 23:54; 24:1; John 19:31, 42; 20:1].

THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS- Ancient Idioms
Now, the real problem is that most of us are unfamiliar with ancient, and especially Jewish, idiomatic ways of speaking. In fact, in the Gospel of Matthew, besides the expression “Three days and three nights” in Matthew 12:40, we also find the expressions “after three days” and “on the third day” [16:21; 17:23; 20:19; 27:63,64; cf. 26:61; 27:40]. The Jews understood all three of these expressions synonymously. In their terminology part of a day was counted as an entire day.

THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS- Need to Be Discerning
From this alleged contradiction we can see that some ways of explaining a Bible difficulty just create bigger difficulties. We need to be careful not to be so worried about resolving an apparent contradiction that we create an even larger one. In addition, the Bible does not always speak in the same way we would. We need to learn the idioms and figures of speech which are used in the Bible if we are to avoid misunderstanding what it really says.

THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS- Conclusion
These are just some of the important lessons to be learned from Matthew 12:40. Of course the real lesson is that Jesus rose from the dead, and that because He lives, we too shall rule and reign forever and ever. On “Three days and three nights,” that’s the CRI Perspective. I’m Hank Hanegraaff.