Posted on 12/15/2014 9:22:24 AM PST by Laissez-faire capitalist
On December 25, Christians around the world will gather to celebrate Jesus' birth. Joyful carols, special liturgies, brightly wrapped gifts, festive foods - these all characterize the feast today, at least in the northern hemisphere. But just how did the Christmas festival originate? How did December 25 become associated with Jesus' birthday?
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 the hear the news of Jesus' birth (Luke 2:8) night 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.
The extrabiblical evidence from the first and second century is equally spare: There is no mention of birth celebrations in the writings of early Christian writers such as Irenaeus (c. 130-200) or Tertullian (c. 160-225). Origen of Alexandria (c.165-264) goes so far as to mock Roman celebrations of birth anniversaries, dismissing them as "pagan" practices - a strong indication that Jesus' birth was not marked with similar festivities at that place and time.1 As far as we can tell, Christmas was not celebrated at all at this point.
This stands in sharp contrast to the very early traditions surrounding Jesus' last days. Each of the Four Gospels provides detailed information about the time of Jesus' death. According to John, Jesus is crucified just as the Passover lambs are being sacrificed. This would have occurred on the 14th of the Hebrew month of Nisan, just before the Jewish holiday began at sundown (considered the beginning of the 15th day because in the Hebrew calendar, days began at sundown). In Matthew, Mark and Luke, however, the Last supper is held after sundown, on the beginning of the 15th. Jesus is crucified the next morning - still, the 15th. ...
Finally, in about 200 C.E., a Christian teacher in Egypt makes reference to the date Jesus was born. According to Clement of Alexandria, several different days had been proposed by various Christian groups. Surprising as it may seem, Clement doesn't mention December 25 at all. Clement writes: "There are those who have determined not only the year of our Lord's birth, but also the day; and they say that it took place in the 28th year of Augustus, and in the 25th day of [the Egyptian month] Pachon [May 20 in our calendar] ... And treating of His passion, with very great accuracy, some say that it took place in the 16th year of Tiberius, on the 25th of Phamenoth [March 21]; and others on the 25th of Pharmuthi [April 21] and others say that on the 19th of Pharmuthi [April 15] the savior suffered. Further, others say that He was born on the 24th or 25th of Pharmuthi [April 20 or 21]."2
Clearly there was great uncertainty, but also a considerable amount of interest, in dating Jesus' birth in the late second century. By the fourth century, however, we find references two dates that were widely recognized - and now also celebrated - as Jesus' birthday: December 25 in the western Roman Empire and January 6 in the East (especially in Egypt and Asia Minor). The modern Armenian church continues to celebrate Christmas on January 6; for most Christians, however, December 25 would prevail, while January 6 eventually came to be known as the Feast of the Epiphany, commemorating the arrival of the magi in Bethlehem. The period between became the holiday season later known as the 12 days of Christmas.
The earliest mention of December 25 as Jesus' birthday comes from a mid-fourth-century Roman almanac that lists the death dates of various Christian bishops and martyrs. The first date listed, December 25, is marked: natus Christus in Betleem Judae: "Christ was born in Bethlehem of Judae."3 ...
[Actually, for a full reading of the article, click on the URL above as the article is actually quite long. References are cited below the article].
Please stay on the discussion at hand and not use a Red Herring and deflect this to a discussion about me as a way to change the topic. Thank you.
The ancients did not select the best and only evidence that was around 200 AD - which would have led them to go with March or April - and thus we would not have Christmas being torn up because of their actions in choosing a celebration of Christ’s birth that was too close to comfort to certain pagan holidays. Blame them, not me.
What wisdom they had in choosing the 25th of December, instead of going with the best evidence they had, which Clement provided!!!!
BTW, by bring in people celebrating their birthday on other days other than the one they were born on, is an apples to oranges argument, as these “many people” aren’t Christ the Lord, and the day chosen for his birth was not in keeping with the evidence they had then to go with from 200 AD.
Tertullian gives the date as Dec. 25 actually. The passage is disputed as an interpolation, but it's there.
Moreover, even if it is an interpolation, Tertullian also gives the Annunciation as March 25, from which Christ's birthday on Dec. 25 nine months later is inferred.
And the evidence from Tertullian harmonizes well with Chrysostom's claim in the 4th century as he was trying to get the feast spread in the East, that the Roman Church celebrated it on the 25th from time immemorial. He even claims the date was found in the census records, at Rome.
I am not trying to change the subject, I am trying to understand why you bring the subject up.
As for: “The ancients did not select the best and only evidence that was around 200 AD - which would have led them to go with March or April - and thus we would not have Christmas being torn up because of their actions in choosing a celebration of Christs birth that was too close to comfort to certain pagan holidays. Blame them, not me.” is a fallacious statement, since you cannot know if we would be in the same situation or not had His birth been celebrated at a different time.
That is dead on. Liturgical calendars have always had some flexibility to them. For almost 2000 years feasts have been moved, added, dropped, changed, shifted temporarily and permanently. We know, for example, that St. Kateri Tekakwitha died on April 17, 1680. But that date very often conflicts with Holy Week and Easter Week, so in this country the American bishops moved it to later in the summer.
The rabid insistence on a historically correct date is symptomatic of misplaced modern priorities.
Does it even matter at this point? Christmas has moved from Jesus and into “Good will to all mankind.” For the most part, Christmas is a celebration anyone can participate celebrating and, outside of some acts of greed, it is a holiday that I think Jesus would appreciate. It is the one holiday where giving versus receiving is the focus, where happiness and joy are integral to its meaning. Many do celebrate Jesus at Christmas. The Catholic mass is an amazing celebration in many churches. Protestants of all denominations make a huge celebration as well. I don’t think Jesus would disapprove.
The theory that makes the most sense to me has to do with marketing.
The pagans held one of their biggest feasts of the year on the Winter Solstice, the shortest day of the year. This maked the end of the year and the start of the new one.
Not to be outdone, Christians held THEIR biggest feast right after the pagan feast ended.
Which feast would prospective converts remember? The last one they attended, most likely. And Christianity prospered. Simple.
On our modern Gregorian calendar, which did NOT exist at the time of Christ Jesus’ birth, He was born on October 4, 4BC.
Born, sometime overnight, on 15 Tishri, 3758 on the Hebrew’s calendar. See:http://antipas.net/heb_cal_3758.htm
I've long suspected that Jesus was born in the spring. Doesn't really matter particularly to me when we celebrate the event. We ought to do it every day.
A.M. = Anno Mundi; that is to say, in the year of the world.
PARALLEL DATINGS OF THE TIMES OF OUR LORD.
DATES OF "THE BEGETTING" (he gennesis, Matthew 1:18,20 (see Revised Version marg.). John 1:14-) OF OUR LORD AND HIS BIRTH. (Luke 2:7. John 1:-14.)
"THE COURSE OF ABIA" (Luke 1:5). This was the eighth of the priestly courses of ministration in the Temple (1 Chronicles 24:10), and occurred, as did the others, twice in the year. The "Courses"were changed every week, beginning each with a Sabbath. The reckoning commenced on the 22nd day of Tisri or Ethanim (Appendix 51. 5). This was the eighth and last day of the Feast of Tabernacles = the "Great Day of the Feast" (John 7:37), and was a Sabbath (Leviticus 23:39). The first course fell by lot to Jehoiarib, and the eighth to Abia or Abijah (1 Chronicles 24:10). Bearing in mind that all the courses served together at the three Great Feasts, the dates for the two yearly "ministrations" of Abiah will be seen to fall as follows: The first 9 ministration was from 12-18 Chisleu = December 6-12. The second ministration was from 12-18 Sivan = June 13-19. The announcement therefore to Zacharias in the Temple as to the conception of John the Baptist took place between 12-18 SIVAN (June 13-19), in the year 5 B.C. After finishing his "ministration", the aged priest "departed to his own house" (Luke 1:23), which was in a city10 in "the hill country" of Juda (verse 39). The day following the end of the "Course of Abia" being a Sabbath (Sivan 19), he would not be able to leave Jerusalem before the 20th. The thirty miles journey would probably occupy, for an old man, a couple of days at least. He would therefore arrive at his house on the 21st or 22nd. This leaves ample time for the miraculous "conception" of Elizabeth to take place on or about 23rd of SIVAN 11 - which would correspond to June 23-24 of that year. The fact of the conception and its date would necessarily be known at the time and afterwards, and hence the 23rd SIVAN would henceforth be associated with the conception of John Baptist as the 1st TEBETH would be with that of our Lord. But the same influences that speedily obscured and presently obliterated the real dates of our Lord's "Begetting" and Birth, were also at work with regard to those of the Forerunner, and with the same results. As soon as the true Birth day of Christ had been shifted from its proper date, videlicet: the 15th of Tisri (September 29), and a Festival Day from the Pagan Calendars substituted for it (videlicet: December 25), then everything else had to be altered too. Hence "Lady Day" in association with March 25 (new style) became necessarily connected with the Annunciation. And June 24 made its appearance, as it still is in our Calendar, as the date of "the Nativity of John the Baptist", instead of, as it really is, the date of his miraculous conception. The Four "Quarter Days" may therefore be set forth thus: first in the chronological order of the events with which they are associated, videlicet:
or, placing the two sets together naturally:-
1 ZUMPT fixes Quirinus' (Cyrenius') First Governorship as 4 B.C. to 1 B.C. Justin Martyr thrice says that our Lord was born under Quirinus (Apol. 1. XXXIV, page 37; XLVI, page 46; Dial. LXXVIII, page 195. Clarks edition). 2 According to some, Augustus died August 19, A.D. 14. Therefore if Tiberius' co-regnancy was for two years before Augustus' death his first year was 765 A.U.C. = 12 A.D.. His fifteenth year consequently was A.U.C. 779 = 26 A.D. = 4030 A.M. and A.C. 30, for our Lord was thirty years of age when He begun His Ministry (Luke 3:23). Clement of Alexandria gives the years of Augustus' reign as being 43-46, according to different reckonings in his day. 3 According to Clement of Alexandria (compare A.D. 190-220) "Our Lord was born in the twenty-eighth year when first the census was ordered to be taken in the reign of Augustus" (Stromata, Book i, see Clark's edition i. pages 444-445). If that is correct, and it is true that a Census was taken every fourteen years, then the next would fall in A.D. 10, and the succeeding one would have been due A.D. 24. 4 Notably the day of the crucifixion, etc (see Appendix 156 and Appendix 165). 5 His statements are, however, very vague, and he mentions several dates claimed by others as correct. 6 Osiris reincarnated. 7 See Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians, Volume III, page 79 (Birch's edition). 8 It is true that the Lebanon shepherds are in the habit of keeping their flocks alive during the winter months, by cutting down branches of trees in the forests in that district, to feed the sheep on the leaves and twigs, when in autumn the pastures are dried up, and in winter, when snow covers the ground (compare Land and Book, page 204), but there is no evidence that the Bethlehem district was afforested in the manner. 9 Reckoning of course from Ethanim or Tisri - the First month of the civil year. The sacred year was six month later, and began on 1st Nisan. 10 The "city" is not named (possibly Juttah, some 30 miles to the south of Jerusalem). 11 The conception of John Baptist was, in view of Luke 1:7, as miraculous as that of Isaac; but it is not necessary to insist upon the complete period of forty sevens in the case of Elizabeth. Therefore the birth of the Forerunner may have been three or four days short of the full two hundred and eighty days, - as indicated in the above table.
|
15 Tishri 3757 - Sukkot / Birth of Yeshua
15 Nisan 3790 - (30 C.E.) Pesach / Crucifixion of Yeshua
Yeshua was 30 when His ministry started, it lasted three and a half years and was crucified on Pesach. Throw out the 33 years, back up 6 months on the Hebrew calendar and you fall into Sukkot. There's lots more...
Very poorly researched article.
The discrepancy in dates between the Eastern Orthodox and Western Catholics has nothing to do with disagreement of the time of Christ’s birth; The Catholics realigned their calendars, while the Orthodox didn’t.
Origen’s mocking of birthdays hardly has any relevance to Christmas; he’s not mocking that people recall fondly a birthday, but what he sees as immoral behavior and general jackassery.
Early Christians had two reasons for deciding that Dec. 25th was Christmas... and they certainly were aware of the Mediterranean climate when they did so:
First was the belief that great prophets were assumed into heaven on the day they had been conceived on Earth, their “heavenly birthday.” Since (using the Western calendar) Jesus was believed to have been killed on Friday, March 25th, that date became celebrated as the Feast of the Annunciation (whereas Good Friday remained tied to the Christian interpretation of the Hebrew calendar). December 25th was 9 months after that.
Second, Jesus identified himself as the true and everlasting Temple of Zion. (”Destroy this Temple and on the third day, I will raise it up...”) Dec. 25th was celebrated as the Feast of the Dedication, when the Spirit of the Living God indwelled within the Temple. Hence, it makes sense to celebrate Dec. 25th as the day when the Spirit of the Living God indwelled within Mankind. In fact, it was on Dec. 25th that Christ actually identified himself as the Temple.
Neither of these suppositions are historical in nature, but both are very pious.
Revelation 12 gives the Messiah’s birth date..
It occurred when the woman was clothed with the sun and the moon under her feet..
That woman in the heavens is a constellation. Part of the Mazzaroth.
This year, that sign was seen on Gregorian September 26th.
A new moon day..
Because of the earth wobbling for 2000 years, that sign has appeared to have ‘moved’ in the sky. they call it the precession of the equinox..
The Messiah was born in the summer, on a New Moon Day. And that New Moon Day was the first day of our Heavenly Father’s 6th month.
And when one follows the calendar in the sky, confirmed in scripture, every major life event the Messiah had occurred on holy appointed days that He gave Israel..
New Moons, Sabbaths and Feasts. His birth, circumcision, dedication, baptism, death burial, resurrection all occurred on those new moons, Sabbaths and feasts detailed in scripture.
Not surprising those holy days are ignored for man’s holy days..
All of that ignores revelation 12 when a sign in the heavens was seen..
That sign, where a woman was clothed with the sun and the moon under her feet, is a real astronomical event. It occurred Gregorian September 26th this year. (It has moved in 2000 years so it wasn’t in ‘September’ back then.
It is, though, New Moon Day when a visible crescent is used to determine a new month.
It is actually at the end of the new moon day when that sign can be seen..
a full moon would not be under the constellation’s feet at the time of a midmonth feast.
It would be on the opposite side of the sky so He wasn’t born Tabernacles but it doesn’t mean He wasnt born at an appointed time.. what unfolds is truly the Word becoming Flesh and dwelling among us..
The ezekiel 46 calendar template shows us that after the new moon, there are six work days, then the weekly sabbath.
The Messiah’s life followed that calendar. And Israel was taught this very calendar .
New moon day- birth (a specific month-1st day of month)
Eighth day of month is the 7th day Sabbath ( 1 new moon + 6 work days+ 1 sabbath=8)
He was born on a new moon day, circumcised the 8th day, which on our Heavenly Father’s calendar is a weekly Sabbath.
He was to be dedicated in the temple 40 days after His birth, per Torah.
It would be the 10th day of the next month... the only appointed day that falls on the 10th day of any month is Yom Kippur, the 10th day of the 7th month. So He was dedicated in the temple on the Day of Atonement! And we know that 5 days later was Tabernacles so certainly He tabernacled there!
He was then baptized on His 30th birthday, again on a New Moon Day, the first day of the 6th month. Scripture details that he immediately was led into the wilderness for 40 days- certainly a shadow from His mother’s purification at His birth.
We know He laid His life down on Feast of Passover, the 14th day. Rested on the weekly and annual Sabbath of Unleavened Bread, the 15th day of the month,and rose on the first day of the week, the 16th day, Feast of First Fruits.
This year, Passover was on a gregorian Monday for most. Problem is, First Fruits is normally observed on Gregorian Sunday and not the third day as new covenant believers and scripture confirms.
But because Ezekiel’s template is ignored for Rome’s calendar, the 15th day of the 7th month is only seen as a annual Sabbath and not also a weekly one.
The Messiah’s life need not be a mystery to His Bride..we can know it all
But it helps to reject the world’s system and go with scripture.
His birth, an appointed time
His circumcision, an appointed time
His dedication in the temple, an appointed time
His baptism, an appointed time
His death, an appointed time
His burial, an appointed time
His resurrection, an appointed time
His return?????
If we don’t see New Moon Days, Sabbaths and Feasts as appointed times (Moeds) we will settle for things like December 25, easter and Saturday/Sunday Sabbaths..
None of those are truth. They are counterfeits to truth..
On His calendar, yesterday Moon’s day, was His 22nd day of His month, His weekly Sabbath.. the world called it a work day.
But only can one see that if they see scripture as the final authoity and not Rome.. Rome isn’t just influential with catholics or Christians.. the world doesn’t run on a calendar named after pope gregory by accident. It is prophetic.
Not all of us.
I have no idea what you are talking about.shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
If today is Tiw’s day for you, like it is for the world, the Kingdom calendar would seem foreign.
It was to me until I rejected the world’s system and followed scripture.
It goes against everything we were ever taught..
NOT according to the Father.
Deu 12:30 Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them, after that they be destroyed from before thee; and that thou enquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise.
Deu 12:31 Thou shalt not do so unto the LORD thy God: for every abomination to the LORD, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods.
Deu 12:32 What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.
The true meaning of Christmas is the recognition that even though December 25th was not the day Jesus Christ was born of a virgin into the world - regardless of whether you use historical precedent (the earliest Christians believed that it was March, April or May (and that the actual day was the 20th or the 21st - no other day than those two) according to historical documents from 200 AD+/- (and no other ironclad documents exist other than those provided by Clement of Alexandria, and Clement’s writing possesses not even a trace of interpolation) - or if you go by a Jewish calendar (the actual exact year that the 6 days of creation took place and thus its origins all the way until now cannot be determined accurately through written, historical documents), the true meaning of Christmas is to celebrate that Jesus is the Word who became flesh and dwelt among us.
That is the true meaning of Christmas, and certainly not commercialism...
Actually, it was chosen because ancient church leaders surmised that 30 shopping days were needed between Thanksgiving and Christmas.
You used a Straw Man in ascribing a fallacious statement to me.
I noted that if the ancients had went with the only evidence that was available (Clement’s writings,) and chose March or April, that Christmas would not have been associated with certain Roman pagan holidays (Saturnalia or the Feast of the Unconquered Sun - each close to December 25th).
If you can show that there are at least two Roman pagan festivals like the aforementioned that would have taken place in March or April that could have been associated with Christ’s birth then you would have some proof that we might be in the same situation if the ancients chose March or April and that I used a fallacious statement.
Among other festivals, the Roman’s celebrated five festivals in late March (the 17th, 19th, 23rd, 24th and 31st) and among other festivals, the Roman’s celebrated four in late April (the 21st, 23rd, 25th and 27th) - and none of these festivals in late March or April (in contrast to late December’s “Saturnalia” on the 17th to the 23rd of December and the “Birthday of the Unconquered Sun” on December 25th) could possibly be used in connection with Christ’s birth.
Thus the ancients did not choose well, and I proffered no fallacious statement.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.