No knowledgeable student of the Bible believes that Jesus was born on 25 December. Tradition has established that date, but it certainly does not match the Biblical narrative.
Having said that, there is even less revelation from God about the birth date of Mary.
I would be interested in hearing your opinion about the Biblical narrative.
This is an absurd statement. There isn't any revelation at all regarding the birth date of Christ. How can there be less than zero?
Tradition has established that date, but it certainly does not match the Biblical narrative.
So if you celebrate Christmas on December 25th, you're demonstrating that Tradition is relevant to the way in which you celebrate Christianity. I thought it was Sola Scriptura for Protestants. This can't be!
I'll ask again. Do you recognize the Sabbath (the Lord's day) as Saturday or Sunday? Because that's another "pesky" tradition that Protestants happily embrace, despite the fact that, biblically speaking, the Lord God made the seventh day, Saturday, the Sabbath, which practicing Jews (and 7th Day Adventists) still recognize. It was the Catholic Church which determined that the significance of Christ's Resurrection on Sunday implied a NEW creation which came full circle on that day in the conquest of death. It's not in the Bible. It's Catholic exegesis. And it's the day the vast majority of Christians agree to worship on.
Additionally, you've relied on Catholic tradition to guarantee the veracity of the four Gospels. Dozens were written in the years and decades following the Ascension of Christ. It was the Catholic Church, weeding out the errors of gnosticism and other heresies which violated accepted TRADITION of the nascent Catholic faith that determined the inerrancy of the "inspired" Gospels. The Church didn't rely on supporting texts to determine what Gospels were inspired and which weren't. It was oral and ritual tradition which served as guide posts since these were the rituals and teaching passed from Christ to the Apostles to the great Evangelizers of that time. So the Gospels, themselves, are beholden to Tradition to support their own claims of inspiration. Otherwise, let's face it, you could be reading the wrong four Gospels out of the dozens that were penned. You have no basis to believe that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were inspired by God if you do not accept the importance of Tradition. And who made that distinction but the Catholic Church, guided by the Holy Spirit?