Why celebrate Jesus birth on December 25?

NewCreation435

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
5,045
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Turns out there isn't a lot of evidence that Jesus incarnation occurred on December 25 at all.

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org...w-testament/how-december-25-became-christmas/

"The Bible offers few clues: Celebrations of Jesus’ Nativity are not mentioned in the Gospels or Acts; the date is not given, not even the time of year. The biblical reference to shepherds tending their flocks at night when they hear the news of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:8) might suggest the spring lambing season; in the cold month of December, on the other hand, sheep might well have been corralled. Yet most scholars would urge caution about extracting such a precise but incidental detail from a narrative whose focus is theological rather than calendrical."
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
But there isn't any stronger evidence that favors any other date. So if the decision is arbitrary, I see no reason not to continue the traditional practice.
 
Last edited:

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Turns out there isn't a lot of evidence that Jesus incarnation occurred on December 25 at all.


Why not?


No one knows the exact date..... I don't know why the exact date matters (Perhaps God would have revealed the date if it mattered at all).... Birthday celebrations are typically a celebration of the PERSON and not the DATE anyway; I often have had the celebration on a date which is not the anniversary and I don't consider that rude or an affront or a slam on my person.



The biblical reference to shepherds tending their flocks at night when they hear the news of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:8) might suggest the spring lambing season; in the cold month of December, on the other hand, sheep might well have been corralled. Yet most scholars would urge caution about extracting such a precise but incidental detail from a narrative whose focus is theological rather than calendrical."


Yes, I've read that the sheep around Jerusalem were "watched" 24/7 year around because they were special sheep raised for the Temple and were very valuable; in that area, they were not watched ONLY during lambing season.


No one has ever claimed that this is the exact anniversary date of His birth; it is simply the date eventually agreed upon for us to celebrate that. Apples and Oranges. Until someone comes up with His birth certificate with a certified date on it, I see no reason to turn our backs on 1700 years of universal tradition and attempt to change the date of the celebration.



MY half cent.


A blessed Advent and Christmas Season to all.....



- Josiah
 

NewCreation435

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
5,045
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I was just curious about why the date was picked and the history behind it. Turns out it is arbitrary and without any evidence that it happened that date at all.
Did you notice a recent survey that said that a majority of people don't consider Christmas to be a religious holiday at all?
 

psalms 91

Well-known member
Moderator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
15,283
Age
75
Location
Pa
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Charismatic
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
My understanding is that when Constantine merged the pagan and Christian this date was picked becuase of the winter soltace celebration. Personally I believe that He was conceived around this time and born around Tabrinacles or Trumpetss.
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I was just curious about why the date was picked and the history behind it. Turns out it is arbitrary and without any evidence that it happened that date at all.

People often ask that question, but we should also keep in mind that there is SOME reason behind the choice that's been made*; it just cannot be nailed down with absolute certainty.

In addition, I think most people know that the date chosen, December 25, is something of a guess. I've noticed on many occasions that the people who raise the issue and say that it is wrong to observe the Nativity of Christ on December 25 seem to think that everyone else, or all churchgoers, firmly believe that December 25 was the date for sure when Christ was born. They don't.

*By an ancient tradition, Christ was conceived on the date that would later be his death day. Since we know pretty closely when the Crucifixion had to have occurred, the birth of Jesus would be in late December.
 

Lamb

God's Lil Lamb
Community Team
Administrator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
32,653
Age
57
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
But there isn't any stronger evidence that favors any other date. So if the decision is arbitrary, I see no reason not to continue the traditional practice.

This is my reply too :) We have a current date for celebration (knowing full well it isn't the exact date) and Christians still promote the Reason for the Season. Jesus came to die for us and I love when Linus tells Charlie Brown et al about the Savior.
 

tango

... and you shall live ...
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
14,695
Location
Realms of chaos
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Why not?


No one knows the exact date..... I don't know why the exact date matters (Perhaps God would have revealed the date if it mattered at all).... Birthday celebrations are typically a celebration of the PERSON and not the DATE anyway; I often have had the celebration on a date which is not the anniversary and I don't consider that rude or an affront or a slam on my person.






Yes, I've read that the sheep around Jerusalem were "watched" 24/7 year around because they were special sheep raised for the Temple and were very valuable; in that area, they were not watched ONLY during lambing season.


No one has ever claimed that this is the exact anniversary date of His birth; it is simply the date eventually agreed upon for us to celebrate that. Apples and Oranges. Until someone comes up with His birth certificate with a certified date on it, I see no reason to turn our backs on 1700 years of universal tradition and attempt to change the date of the celebration.



MY half cent.


A blessed Advent and Christmas Season to all.....



- Josiah

What evidence there is of December 25 seems to date largely to Jewish traditions that prophets died on the same day they were conceived. If Jesus' death could be tied to March 25 (and some believe it can, which is at least possible to guesstimate based on Passover dates etc) then add nine months for gestation and you get December 25. Of course that assumes Mary carried him for exactly nine months and zero days, which just adds to the assumptions.

I don't see any affront to celebrating a birthday on a day other than the exact date a person was born. What troubles me are the kind of songs and teachings that Jesus was born on Christmas Day, and the endless focus on "keeping Christ in Christmas" when it's highly debatable whether December 25 actually has anything to do with Jesus Christ at all. Just to add to the irony, the people who want to "keep Christ in Christmas" often seem to do little more than fight against generic sayings like "Happy Holidays" (even though other faiths celebrate festivals around the same time), object to abbreviations such as Xmas, and then display little Christ-like behavior as they fight others to get the best deals as they stock up on pointless consumer doodads because the god Mammon said that's what they had to do around this time of year.

Given that Jesus was born as a man is so much more important than when Jesus was born as a man, aside from challenging anything that does assign a particular theological significance to an arbitrarily chosen date there's little point getting agitated about it one way or the other. But for bonus "good Christian" points one can always pull the verse from Jeremiah against those who cut a tree and take it into their house, and adorn it with silver and gold. Never mind the fact that most of us who do decorate a tree somehow manage to get through the season without worshipping it....
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
What troubles me are the kind of songs and teachings that Jesus was born on Christmas Day, and the endless focus on "keeping Christ in Christmas" when it's highly debatable whether December 25 actually has anything to do with Jesus Christ at all.
But whichever day is celebrated as Christmas, that IS Christmas by definition.
 

tango

... and you shall live ...
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
14,695
Location
Realms of chaos
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
But whichever day is celebrated as Christmas, that IS Christmas by definition.

Sure, but leaving aside the semantic gymnastics it's not theologically accurate to sing the songs on December 25 that talk of Jesus being "born this day" or some such. We can mark Christ's birthday on what we call Christmas Day but that doesn't mean that Christmas has any connection to Christ other than the name and the fact we picked a date at random.

If we make the case that we celebrate Christ's birth on a random date that was picked hundreds of years ago for reasons that aren't entirely clear and it's just a tradition that's one thing. If the case is being made that December 25 is special in and of itself, as opposed to being a date picked based on tradtion based on guesswork, that's a different thing entirely.
 

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,573
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Nm
 
Last edited:

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
I like the Orthodox Christmas, but that's because the lines are shorter and the deals are better.
What I don't like is that the pagans have set the date for remembering Christ's crucifixion. We should remember on Passover, but the Romans set a pagan holiday date instead. Just one of many gentile faux pas in setting days of remembrance. Even the word "Easter" is a derivation for the Greek fertility goddess, Aster. Yikes!
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Sure, but leaving aside the semantic gymnastics it's not theologically accurate to sing the songs on December 25 that talk of Jesus being "born this day" or some such.
Considering all the Christmas hymns and other references, this particular item seems a small issue.

We can mark Christ's birthday on what we call Christmas Day but that doesn't mean that Christmas has any connection to Christ other than the name and the fact we picked a date at random.
That's what a commemoration is, all right--a celebration of a past event. Thanksgiving was set arbitrarily, too, but it still memorializes the 17th century event adequately.

If we make the case that we celebrate Christ's birth on a random date that was picked hundreds of years ago for reasons that aren't entirely clear and it's just a tradition that's one thing. If the case is being made that December 25 is special in and of itself, as opposed to being a date picked based on tradtion based on guesswork, that's a different thing entirely.
OK. No problems then.
 

Imalive

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 3, 2017
Messages
2,315
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
What evidence there is of December 25 seems to date largely to Jewish traditions that prophets died on the same day they were conceived. If Jesus' death could be tied to March 25 (and some believe it can, which is at least possible to guesstimate based on Passover dates etc) then add nine months for gestation and you get December 25. Of course that assumes Mary carried him for exactly nine months and zero days, which just adds to the assumptions.

I don't see any affront to celebrating a birthday on a day other than the exact date a person was born. What troubles me are the kind of songs and teachings that Jesus was born on Christmas Day, and the endless focus on "keeping Christ in Christmas" when it's highly debatable whether December 25 actually has anything to do with Jesus Christ at all. Just to add to the irony, the people who want to "keep Christ in Christmas" often seem to do little more than fight against generic sayings like "Happy Holidays" (even though other faiths celebrate festivals around the same time), object to abbreviations such as Xmas, and then display little Christ-like behavior as they fight others to get the best deals as they stock up on pointless consumer doodads because the god Mammon said that's what they had to do around this time of year.

Given that Jesus was born as a man is so much more important than when Jesus was born as a man, aside from challenging anything that does assign a particular theological significance to an arbitrarily chosen date there's little point getting agitated about it one way or the other. But for bonus "good Christian" points one can always pull the verse from Jeremiah against those who cut a tree and take it into their house, and adorn it with silver and gold. Never mind the fact that most of us who do decorate a tree somehow manage to get through the season without worshipping it....

LOL someone on Facebook once said we were bad for making an idol of a tree. I said: Yes it's terrible and disrespectful how they treat their idol. It just gets burned when it's over.
 

JRT

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 30, 2016
Messages
780
Age
81
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
No
Dionysius Exigius (aka Dennis the Short), a monk from Russia who died about 544, was asked by Pope John I to set out the dates for Easter from the years 527 to 626. It seems that the Pope was keen to produce some order in the celebration of Easter. Dionysius decided to begin with what he considered to be the year of Jesus' birth. He chose the year in which Rome had been founded and determined, from the evidence known to him, that Jesus had been born 753 years later. He did have an error in that because one emperor changed his name during his reign, Dionysius counted him twice.

He was almost certainly acquainted with a suggestion by Hippolytus (170–236) that the date of Jesus' birth was December 25, but the trouble was that Hippolytus had not backed up this claim with sound arguments. Dionysius, however, had just the argument: His contemporaries claimed that God created the earth on March 25. It was inconceivable that the son of God could have been in any way imperfect. Therefore Jesus must have been conceived on March 25. This meant that he must have been born nine months later—December 25. Dionysius also concluded that, as a perfect being, Jesus could not have lived an incomplete life so he must have died on March 25 as well!

December 25 was an auspicious choice. In 274, in Rome, the Emperor Aurelian declared December 25 a civic holiday in celebration of the birth of Mithras, the sun god. By 336, in that same city, Christians countered by celebrating the birth of Jesus, the son of God, on December 25. Christians in Antioch in 375 celebrated the birth of Jesus on January 6. Christians in Alexandria did not begin to celebrate Christmas at all until 430. So until Dionysius came along there was confusion over dates, and debates raged, even over the usefulness of celebrating the birth of Jesus at all. What had been universally important for all Christians—the pre-eminent event—was the celebration of Easter.

When, in 527, he formalized the date of Jesus' birth, Dionysius put Christmas on the map. Jesus was born, he declared, on December 25 in the Roman year 753. Dionysius then suspended time for a few days, declaring January 1, 754—New Year's day in Rome—as the first year in a new era of world history.

With a stroke of ingenuity Dionysius had managed to shift the attention of the church from Easter to Christmas. From this point in time it seemed only logical to celebrate the birth of Jesus before his death. If Jesus' death by crucifixion had made possible salvation for all people everywhere, so the argument went, then his birth was the sign that God was identifying with human kind by taking human form.

But Dionysius made a mistake in his calculations. Perhaps he had never read the gospel account of the birth of Jesus. In Matthew Jesus is said to have been born while Herod was still King (2:1). That would translate into 4 BC (or even earlier) according to the calculations of Dionysius. As a consequence, for Christians the year 2000 is not two thousand years after the birth of Jesus, but more like 2004.

That was not his only mistake. Dionysius followed the convention of his times and, as the Roman calendar moved from the year 753 to 754, he called the latter "year one" of the New World order—anno domini, the year of our Lord. The concept of naught (zero) didn't come into Europe from Arabia and India until about two hundred years later. As a result, centuries end with naught and begin with the digit one. So for us the year 2000 was the end of one millennium but it was not the beginning of the next: that occurred in 2001.

Later, when Pope Gregory tidied up the calendar on 24 February 1582, the calendar lost eleven days. To synchronise the calendar of Dionysius with the movement of the sun, October 4 became October 15, and to avoid having to make further adjustments a leap year was introduced. Pope Gregory must also have known of the mistakes made by Dionysius but all he did was to confirm them, perhaps hoping that no one would notice.

There is one other problem. Bishop Ussher (1581–1656) worked out the precise year of creation as 4004 BC (he knew about Dionysisus getting the date of Jesus birth wrong). But he also advanced the view that the earth had a total life span of six thousand years. In order to come up with this conclusion he based his calculations on all the generations mentioned in the Bible.

In reality we do not know when Jesus was born—neither the year, the month, nor the day. The chronology of our western calendar is based on mythology masquerading as theology. We do well to treat it all with the humour it deserves.
 

popsthebuilder

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 17, 2015
Messages
1,850
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Single
There seems to be rather strong evidence that the date is unfortunately related to an ancient pagan celebration of chaos called saturnalia if I'm not mistaken.

I have not studied the probability of this myself.

We must focus on the celebration of the birth of the Christ of GOD and recall the teachings and example of Him. A giving spirit is too a good thing to keep in rememberance at this time.

peace

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
 

popsthebuilder

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 17, 2015
Messages
1,850
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Single
(from Wikipedia)

Although probably the best-known Roman holiday, Saturnalia as a whole is not described from beginning to end in any single ancient source. Modern understanding of the festival is pieced together from several accounts dealing with various aspects.[6]*The Saturnalia was the dramatic setting of the multivolume work of that name by*Macrobius, a Latin writer from*late antiquity*who is the major source for information about the holiday. In one of the interpretations in Macrobius's work, Saturnalia is a festival of light leading to the*winter solstice, with the abundant presence of candles symbolizing the quest for knowledge and truth.[7]*The renewal of light and the coming of the*new year*was celebrated in the later*Roman Empire*at the*Dies Natalis Solis Invicti,

the "Birthday of the Unconquerable Sun", on 23 December.

(That is throwing up red flags for me personally. The word Sun is not the Word/ Son)

[8]Although we are now led to believe that Saturnalia ia the holiday, in which people, during the winter, conserved the kindling of mother nature by bringing evergreens into their home.

The popularity of Saturnalia continued into the*3rd*and*4th centuries*AD, and as the*Roman Empire*came under Christian rule, many of its customs were recast into or at least influenced the seasonal celebrations surrounding*Christmas*and the*New Year.[9]

(peace)

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Sooner or later, we have to ask those who are so opposed to celebrating the Lord's birth on December 25 to tell us which other date should be used...and why.

Well??
 
Top Bottom