I found this while surfing the web. It's from a website called touchstoneforum. It's definitely a pro-jw website. They have some good 607 vs. 587 discussions over there. It's run by a poster named WRENCH. This is two of his posts on the inappropriateness of birthday celebrations (by posting this I'm not agreeing to it, I just thought the board may find it interesting):
I'm sorry this is so lengthy but hey I didn't write it.
_________________________
I think that one should allow 2 Corinthians 6:14-17 be their guide as to what celebrations they partake of. How does this apply to "birthdays" you will ask? Please not the following:
In regards to the scriptural references to birthdays, I would say at most, since there are the only two 'clear' references in the scriptures to birthdays, that it puts them in a bad light. I would never conclude from just these two passages that birthdays should not be celebrated, but it does say at least something about them, and that 'something' doesn't appear to be all that favorable.
Both celebrants were pagan kings, and both birthdays gave way to atrocities. However, that in itself is not conclusive. I feel that there is more that weighs in on the subject.
When Job’s sons “held a banquet at the house of each one on his own day” it should not be supposed that they were celebrating their birthdays. (Job 1:4) “Day” in this verse translates the Hebrew word yohm and refers to a period of time from sunrise to sunset. On the other hand, “birthday” is a compound of the two Hebrew words yohm (day) and hul•le'dheth. The distinction between
“day” and one’s birthday can be seen in Genesis 40:20, where both
expressions appear: “Now on the third day it turned out to be Pharaoh’s birthday<LITERALLY, Pharaoh” of (hul•le'dheth) birth the (yohm) day “the .” So to me, it doesn't seem likely that Job 1:4 refers to a birthday, as is unquestionably the case at Genesis 40:20. It would seem that Job’s seven sons held a family gathering (possibly a spring or harvest
festival) and as the feasting made the week-long circuit, each son hosted the banquet in his own house “on his own day.”
I think it is interesting what is stated by the historian Augustus Neander concerning Christianity in the first three centuries. He writes: “The notion of a birthday festival was far from the ideas of the Christians of this period.” (The History of the Christian Religion and Church, During the Three
First Centuries, translated by H. J. Rose, 1848, p. 190)
Also worthy of notice is this quote from the New Catholic Encyclopedia: “Origen . . . insists that ‘of all the holy people in the Scriptures, no one is recorded to have kept a feast or held a great banquet on his birthday. It is only sinners (like Pharaoh and Herod) who make great rejoicings over the day on which they were born into
this world below.’”—The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1913, Vol. X, p. 709.
I think we know whether or not Origen regarded Job son's as celebrating their birthday or not.
Also, concerning the OT Jews: M’Clintock and Strong’s Cyclopaedia (1882, Vol. I, p. 817) says the Jews “regarded birthday celebrations as parts of idolatrous worship . . . , and this probably on account of the idolatrous rites with which they were observed in honor of those who were regarded as the patron gods of the day on which the party was born.”
There is certainly nothing wrong with recognizing one's birthday, but to engage in a 'pagan-type' celebration of one's birthday, in view of the foregoing, would be 'out-of-place' for a Christian as 2 Corinthians 6:14-17 makes clear.
Notice these two references:
“The various customs with which people today celebrate their birthdays have a long history. Their origins lie in the realm of magic and religion. The customs of offering congratulations, presenting gifts and celebrating—complete with lighted candles—in ancient times were meant to protect the birthday celebrant from the demons and to ensure his security for the coming year. . . . Down to the fourth century Christianity rejected the birthday celebration as a pagan custom.”—Schwäbische Zeitung (magazine supplement Zeit und Welt), April 3/4, 1981, p. 4.
So, what would Jesus view of birthday celebrations be in this light?
“The Greeks believed that everyone had a protective spirit or daemon who attended his birth and watched over him in life. This spirit had a mystic relation with the god on whose birthday the individual was born. The Romans also subscribed to this idea. . . . This notion was carried down in human belief and is reflected in the guardian angel, the fairy godmother and the
patron saint. . . . The custom of lighted candles on the cakes started with the Greeks. . . . Honey cakes round as the moon and lit with tapers were placed on the temple altars of . . . . Birthday candles, in folk belief, are endowed with special magic for granting wishes. . . . Lighted tapers and sacrificial fires have had a special mystic significance ever since man first set up altars to his gods. The birthday candles are thus an honor and tribute to the birthday child and bring good fortune. . . .Birthday greetings and wishes for happiness are an intrinsic part of this holiday. . . . Originally the idea was rooted in magic. . . . Birthday greetings have power for good or ill because one is closer to the spirit world on this day.”—The Lore of Birthdays (New York, 1952), Ralph and Adelin
Linton, pp. 8, 18-20.
______________________________
It has become a matter of discussion as to how one determines if they are obedient to the words as mentioned above at 2 Cor. 6:14-17. The days of the week that are commonly used, the names of the planets and some constellations are all named after false religions gods and godesses. Even our currently used divisions of hours and minutes comes from a Babylonian origination. Some claim that wedding rings are of pagan origin. A recent article about pinatas has also raised the same question about its origins. How should Christians feel about these things? Should they be avoided so as not to "touch" the unclean thing?
One crucial point of difference is this. In so referring to planets or days of the week as they have been named, are we in any way mimicking the actions of some pagan religious event? No, clearly we are not and that is what we want to protect ourselves from. God hates pagan religion. Should we want to imitate a religious rite invented by the Devil, in defiance of true worship, for the sake of our own entertainment? Does one really think Jesus would be found doing such things? Clearly not.
What about wedding rings? Do they decidedly have a pagan origination? One will find that is not an easy thing to determine. For instance, we have the following: “Originally . . . the ring was a fetter, used to bind the captive bride.” (For Richer, for Poorer) “The ring is a relatively modern substitute for the gold coin or other article of value with which a man literally purchased his wife from her father.” (The Jewish Wedding Book) “The wedding ring is supposed to be of Roman origin, and to have sprung from the ancient custom of using rings in making agreements.” (American Cyclopædia) “Various explanations have been given of the connection of the ring with marriage. It would appear that wedding-rings were worn by the Jews prior to Christian times.”—The International Cyclopaedia.
It should be apparent that the precise origin of the wedding ring is uncertain. Some may claim one thing, others may claim another as to it's origin. It really can not be decisively determined.
Due to it's uncertainty of origination, Christians can not categorically refer to it as a mimicking of a false religious rite, and because of that it is left to the individuals to decide if such is appropriate for them as a married couple.
The same is true of the pinata. Whereas even popular opinion may think of it as having pagan religious roots, such is not necessarily the case, for one will soon see upon investigation that the actual root of the pinata is quite elusive with many different theories behind it. Therefore, just as in the case of the wedding ring, this is a matter of conscience for the Christian to decide.
One can draw a parallel to the situation in the first century that Paul addressed. There were some Gentiles who whenever they ate meat, it was part of a religious ceremony to their god. When they became Christian, those who were weak in their conscience would not eat meat because they could not separate the pagan concept from the act. Due to this, Paul stated that Christian should not ruin the conscience of their weaker brothers but should refrain from eating such in their presence so as not to stumble them. But, was the eating of meat categorically forbidden because it had come to possess in the mind of some, a pagan connotation? No, it was not. (1 Cor. chapter 8)
Therefore, because an item or a practice has acquired in the mind of some a pagan religious connection, that does not mean that this was its origination or its intent at inception. Because something has COME TO MEAN such in a person's mind, does not mean that it needs to be viewed that way from that point forward as a pagan religious imitation. If one can not separate the two in his mind, as some of those weaker conscienced Christians in the first century, then they should surely refrain for the sake of their conscience. But, on the other hand, those who are convinced that an item or practice does not have a pagan religious inception, it is their choice as to how to handle it, always considering the conscience of their brothers.
There is no doubt about the origination of the common practices in relation to birthdays, Christmas, Easter, New Year's, Halloween and the like, and due to that, those clearly pagan religious simulations in connection with them should be avoided by Christians.