Theologian R.C. Sproul explains why there’s nothing nefarious about the X in Xmas:
The simple answer to your question is that the X in Christmas is used like the R in R.C. My given name at birth was Robert Charles, although before I was even taken home from the hospital my parents called me by my initials, R.C., and nobody seems to be too scandalized by that.
X can mean so many things. For example, when we want to denote an unknown quantity, we use the symbol X. It can refer to an obscene level of films, something that is X-rated. People seem to express chagrin about seeing Christ’s name dropped and replaced by this symbol for an unknown quantity X. Every year you see the signs and the bumper stickers saying, “Put Christ back into Christmas” as a response to this substitution of the letter X for the name of Christ.
First of all, you have to understand that it is not the letter X that is put into Christmas. We see the English letter X there, but actually what it involves is the first letter of the Greek name for Christ. Christos is the New Testament Greek for Christ. The first letter of the Greek word Christos is transliterated into our alphabet as an X. That X has come through church history to be a shorthand symbol for the name of Christ.
(Via: Challies.com)
December 9th, 2010 | 2:46 pm
I think R.C. is missing the boat if he thinks that “put Christ back in Christmas” is primarily a protest against the transcription of “Xmas.” But otherwise, yeah. I’ve tried to explain that, but people still think it’s irreverent or something.
December 13th, 2010 | 10:08 pm
I do not believe the use of X as a respectful replacement for the Greek letter chi is actually the intent of the X usage in most cases. In particular the instances where I have seen it used since my childhood were always in cases where users were not sympathetic to Christianity, often wrote out in full far longer words than Christmas, and probably would not have known a letter chi if it fell on them. Even if some originally may have used it with sincerity in the past, it does not have that impact or intent today. It is not read that way by the ordinary person. It has a dismissive, evasive, actually ‘hateful’ connotation in current usage. It does not reflect anything even approximating respect. It is naive to think otherwise.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact