Is December 25th “Christmas” really a Christianized pagan holiday as some teach? This Christmas I want to give Christians reading this post the Christmas gift of an alternative reason why the early church accepted December 25th as the date for the Lord’s birth.
I know this information could rain on the Christmas parade of some Grinches that want all us Christians to know that we are really celebrating a pagan holiday, but so be it.
There is growing evidence that some in the early church actually thought that Jesus was born on Dec 25th. I became aware of this just recently by listening to Chris Pinto and by doing a bit of my own research into what he said. I highly recommend listening to all of Pinto’s teachings because he gives Christians information, in-depth research, and food for thought that most will never get in their churches. Here is a direct link to Pinto’s website where his material can be found.
You need to listen to the audio (about 30 min) for the more complete story. The gist of Pinto’s teaching is that early Christians had reason to believe that Jesus was born on Dec 25th. There was Jewish tradition that taught that a prophet from God died on the same day that they were conceived or born (remember the early church had a lot of Jewish influence).
In about 220 AD, Tertullian wrote that Jesus was crucified on March 25, AD 29. Thus, if there were some in the early church that believed that Jesus died on March 25, they could have also believed that He was conceived on March 25. Those that believed these dates of the death of the Lord could have influenced the church to set the December 25th date of the Lord’s birth (nine months after His March 25th conception).
I certainly am not saying that Tertullian has the date of the Lord’s death correct. On the contrary, I think the date of the year is impossible. But, some in the early church, like Tertullian, believed this date, and they had influence in the early church.
I do not believe that Jesus could have died in 29AD because from what we know from the gospels and from recorded history that early year would not have allowed Jesus the necessary time to carry out His ministry. It is much more likely that Jesus was crucified in 33AD.
I also do not think that Jesus was born on December 25th. I am more in the Jesus was born on the Feast of Tabernacles camp and the thinking that Jesus would then have been thus conceived on December 25.
Anyway, the Christianized pagan holiday argument seems to fail for a number of reasons. The most common pagan holiday in that season was the Saturnalia festival but it was celebrated on December 17th not on December 25th. The Sol Invictus (unconquered sun) god holiday was not widely celebrated in the Roman Empire before the date of the Birth of Christ was already established in much of Christianity.
It is more reasonable to assume that pagans wanted to substitute the pagan holiday of Sol Invictus than to believe Christianity picked Dec 25th to Christianize that pagan holiday. Later the pagans combined the Saturnalia festival and other pagan holidays to blind everyone with black light about any incarnation of God’s Son.
I lot of pagan holidays traditions certainly are practiced on Christmas but they are not the reason for Christianity celebrating that date. The early church probably did not pick that date to try to Christianize any pagan holiday. It probably was the other way around. Pagans were trying to paganize the growing Christian influence within the Roman Empire.
There is nothing new under the sun. We can see the same paganizing of whatever Christians believe going on in our modern era. Christians did not pick Dec 25 to Christianize a pagan holiday. It is much more likely that unbelievers under Satanic guidance were used to paganized a Christian truth and tradition.
If you celebrate Christmas as the birth of Christ, you may have more in common with early Christianity than the later pagan and Christian grinches that came along trying to steal away Christmas celebration from all Christians.
Merry Christmas to all! Even to any still unconvinced Grinches.
Amen… here is a great site to learn more. I went thru this sight quite a bit back in September. I might have to complete the questions & answers on this Torah calendar. Lots of good information.
http://torahcalendar.com/
Merry Christmas to you too!
Dear Don,
This is an awesome article. I get tired of the legalistic paranoids screaming about having a Christmas tree is going to land you in the fires of hell. Your history is quite accurate. Although, I have read a compelling argument for an April date of birth (perhaps I am biased toward that theory because I have an April birthday). The whole issue has also come down to the “meat sacrificed to idols argument”. If you are paganizing Christianity by stringing a few lights and having a tree, then, well, you have a serious theological problem. If you are sincere in your desire to celebrate the Lords birth, however you choose to decorate, then it seems there is therefore no condemnation. It amazes me how many people rush to put themselves back under the bondage of the law, instead of the freedom that comes through a life in the spirit.
I enjoyed your article, and if I can find the old article about the April birthdate, I will email it to you. It was pretty interesting. 🙂
May your Christmas be blessed. It would be even more beautiful if you had one of our Oregon Christmas trees… 🙂
Rod in Oregon
Thanks Rod,
Fear not, in this part of Missouri they are a whole lot of big pines.
Merry Christmas everyone.
To Don, Did you by any chance look over the torah calander link Bill shared? I skimmed over a lot of it because it’s long but several things caught my eye. In particular: The Messiah is the one who made the covenant with many and stopped the sacrifices mid-way. I’ve always thought that was the future anti-Christ. Was wondering what your thoughts on this are. It also gives a precise time and date of Messiah’s birth. Huh. I can’t say yay or nay.
Did you ever notice that the more legalistic a preacher is about such subjects, the fatter they are, the more they get caught naughty with a church member(male or female), the bigger their personal jet is(of course, to show how much God wants them to show His love for them), etc? I celebrate Christmas, both on December 25 and January 7(in respect to my Serbian side) because I am estatic about the fact that Jesus was born for the Salvation of all who will receive it. Period. Merry Christmas to all and Maranantha!
Caitlin,
I just very briefly glanced at it. I did not see where the website had anything worth reading in relation to this topic. It looked like some kind of Jewish theology to me and I really was not interested in getting into it. I have decided I will not get into judging everything written on a website when someone puts up a link. Let the reader beware when they follow links that some commentator puts up. Giving my opinion on who makes the covenant etc, is just getting off topic here. I am sure anyone that reads my articles and Revelation commentary already knows my answer.
I watched the guest Colin Nicholl: “The Great Christ Comet” on Socrates in the City NRB channel last night and there is a lot of buzz from Colin’s a (Cambridge Ph.D. and New Testament scholar) book on the star of Bethlehem was actually a comet. The comet was at 6 BC and would put Jesus at 35 in 29AD. The video below of the episode is worth watching and his research is being lauded by respectable Christian apologist’s including John Lennox. Hope the Koenig family has a Blessed Christmas & New Year.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mT-8O8S_Fw
Merry Christmas Don, as usual your article was great. Yes I do believe as well from my research that Christ was born in March. My wife tells me that regardless of when He was born it is fitting we celebrate the Savior of the World’s birth, for an otherwise dammed people. God sent Moses to bring the Children of Israel out of captivity, he sent no one for us, but he came Himself, what a blessed event. This year we have done nothing in so far decorating, we lost our oldest son in the vehicle accident last Dec. 15, he was the apple of my wife’s eye, however because of the fact that he knew Jesus as his Lord and Savior is the only comfort we need. May this new year be blessed for all those that know their Savior, and his name is Jesus. Merry Christmas to You and Your’s Don and all who read your blog.
“I just very briefly glanced at it. I did not see where the website had anything worth reading in relation to this topic.”
What??
It has everything to do w/ the topic! Lol It goes hand in hand w/ the post in your article. Scroll down & open up the “The Birth of the Messiah” but here is the site of this calendar 1st day of the 7th month & in the same month of Tabernacles .. http://torahcalendar.com/Calendar.asp?PYM=Y-3M7
just to say it has nothing to do w/ the subject at hand is astounding. If u just look under the hood. Oh well. Be it as it may.
Keep in mind that the Torah c. is the Creation Calendar. It’s the calendar that was used in that day then the authorities at one point attempted to stamp it out but w/ great effort it remained. The full story is in that website. Cant just glance at it then think u know.
“The seventh month of the Jewish calendar is the month of the Feast of Tabernacles.” from this article.. “..I am more in the Jesus was born on the Feast of Tabernacles camp…”
I posted it because it goes along w/ this article in fact backs it up 100% it’s a very good study. And was out of love if u don’t think it has nothing to do w/ it my apologies. ??
Hi Don,
Thank you for the Chris Pinto link. For some reason it cuts off half way through but what I heard was helpful. This has been a point of discussion in our household for a number of years. Even though its roots may be in question, the world has come to understand this season as a CHRIST-filled season, hence the reason for eliminating it from all things secular/humanist/pagan. I have watched this war against CHRISTmas for many years, and since the hostility to eliminate the name of Jesus Christ the Son of God from the public sphere has increased significantly this year, we see the necessity of celebrating our Saviour’s birth as a tremendous opportunity for sharing the Gospel. We, as a family, have been seeking to celebrate our Saviour’s birth in a simpler manner that places Him at the forefront as we celebrate His gift to us – Salvation and Redemption.
I am so glad you began a new blog. Normally, I don’t follow blogs, but I have enjoyed reading your posts over the years and I appreciate your perspective. I have never responded before, so this is a first.
Blessings to you and yours during this most blessed time to celebrate our Savior’s birth!
M ~
(And yes, we understand His birth was very likely at a different time of year) 🙂
Thanks M,
I listened to Pinto’s message on Bannon Howse’s Worldview Weekend site but then went to the source for the link. I never listened to the link on Pinto’s site so it may be faulty. Hopefully that will not be the case in the future. I know the link on Worldview Weekend had the full message but you may not find it there anymore. They break all my links to his website for some reason.
Today Pinto has a message on Christian trees not being Pagan http://www.worldviewweekend.com/radio/audio/chris-pinto-december-22-2015
Hi Wayne Young,
Sorry to hear about the loss of your son but I am happy to hear they he was saved. I hope the knowledge of his salvation and the knowledge of his joy with the Lord will bring Christmas joy to you and yours.
Bill,
I said I did not read the website. I cannot read whole websites just because someone puts up or sends me a link to the homepage. You want to read all of mine? It might take you months. If you know of an article that is relevant to an article that I wrote then put in a direct link to the article not the homepage of a website.
My article was not about Jesus being born on the Feast of Tabernacles, although I said I was in that camp and gave a link as to why. The point of the article is that Christians probably did Christianize a pagan holiday.
I might get around to reading some of this but it certainly will not happen within the next few days. You could provide some kind of brief summary as to why you think it backs up what I said in my article.
Hi Don,
I’m in agreement with you on the dating,and back a few years ago when I was working on the timeline,I discovered a great,now lost article that helped explain the historical dating contradiction of some major documents from BC and AD that have caused Scholar’s to dispute each other for centuries.
Back then,I came across a fabulous documentary, and it follows the dating that you favor,as do I. And for those who don’t,it’s food for thought. Runs about an hour.
The title: the Star of Bethlehem
https://www.google.com/url?q=http://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3Du7YTE7WFB6Y&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwj6u5-UxvXJAhUBKCYKHVkcAk8QtwIIDjAB&usg=AFQjCNG2mZZBgown5MyGzYDghOHkWmoj7A
Merry Christmas all !
Good point Don. Sorry about that my bad. Next time I will be more specific to a relative point within a website that may relate. 🙂
Merry Christmas & a safe New Year!
Thank you for this article, Don, it’s very informative. Blessed Christmas to you and yours.
Wayne Young, you and your family are in my prayers.
Hi Stephen,
I just watched the link that you put up. The interview convinces me. I always thought that the text required a comet but Colin Nicholl nailed the details and the timing. I never thought it had to be 6 BC but now that seems very likely. What is missing from the interview is any non biblical record of a Comet occurring in that year. Perhaps there is some references to that in his book. The dating of comet also suggests that Jesus was born on the Feast of Tabernacles. That has been my position.
There now is no reason for me to watch the Star of Bethlehem link that David L. put up. An exploding star fulfillment seems very unlikely.
Thanks for the link. I may get the book.
P.S.
I just looked at the chapters in his book and the appendixes on Amazon. I see the book does have a 6 BC Chinese reference to a comet and a reference to a meteor storm in 6 BC that he claims was comet related.
Hi Don,
The documentary is not about an exploding star,but a conjunction of two planets. There is as wealth of information in the documentary,but suit yourself. I will check out the link you two are excited about. Oh ya,the documentary is backed up with all biblical references.
Hi Don,
Also,all the astronomical data is in the documentary backing up the Bible,plus the animation of it all is real great. It’s apparent that you only watched the first few minutes and we’re bored with the back story, and so,I’m a little disappointed that you would discount it without a fair assessment. I won’t belabor the point,but you can’t judge a book by its cover,can you?
Hi David L,
I certainly would not believe any conjunction of planets theory fulfilling what Luke said.
By the way, Nicholl mentions that Star of Bethlehem documentary and a little of why he did not buy into it in the interview.
I believe very large comets have had a huge impact on the earth in the past. Some examples might be the judgments and other events in the days of Exodus, the long day of Joshua, and the sun dial event in the days of Hezekiah. I also think a huge comet will play a role in the Revelation events.
It just stands to reason to me that the God that created everything would create these bodies to fulfill His timings through His own creation. That way unbelievers will not acknowledge that the events are from God and they still will not believe. I think that was true in the past and I believe it will be true in the future. The unbelieving world will always come up with a natural explanation. What they do not understand is that a God who planned it all planned it all.
First of all,the guy who made the documentary is a born again believer. And I would take his testimony over some university professor. And second,God is the designer of celestial mechanics,and he could have timed this rare event to fit prophecy. As he does regularly. Also,how do you account for Jesus being 37-38 years old at his crucifixion? I thought the Bible says he was about 30 when he began his 3 year ministry?
David L,
I never said I watched the documentary at all. You need to read what I said instead of what you think I said. Nicholl presented arguments again that theory in his interview. That along with my own beliefs that it was a comet led me to the conclusion that any exploding star theory or (conjunction of planets in this case) theory would not satisfy the details in Luke. Nicholl wrote this book because he could not buy into the documentary you linked to.
You really ought to consider both arguments rather than saying one theory is correct because a born again Christian made the documentary and the other was just some Professor. What kind of argument is that? Obviously you have not watched the interview yet. From what Nicholl said in the interview I do not think there is any question that Professor Nicholl’s is a believer.
I agree that God is the designer of celestial mechanics. Even said so in my last comment. Perhaps I added that part after you read it and you did not read it again?
My point is not that there could not have been a conjunction of planets. There always are conjunctions of planets but they are hardly significant visual events on earth. Besides, a conjunction is a very short term event it does not fit the prophecy for that and other reasons. That is part of what the interview and the book explains. He also adds Revelation 12 to the argument.
Like I said, I believe it had to be a comet if it was not purely supernatural light. I do not like the 6 BC date either but I have to admit he makes the case for that possibility.
Maybe Luke did not really know exactly how old Jesus was when he started his Ministry. That may be why be says about thirty instead of thirty. We also do not know for sure how long the Lord’s ministry was. 3 years or 3 1/2 years is what most believe, but that is surmised from feast presumptions.
I personally have favored a birth date that agrees with our calendar dating of the Lord’s Birth. Some have problems with that late date but I believe Grant Jeffery made a pretty good case for that date in “Armageddon Appointment With Destiny”.
However, if new information sways the argument toward another date I will consider that.
Hi Don,
If the professor said “the star of Bethlehem” was about an exploding star,then he misrepresented the work by Larson. It is too complicated for time and space here,but the biblical case made by Larson fits a different timing because of evidence found in manuscripts dating around the 15th century of Josephus’ writings. These prior manuscripts all data Herod’s death to 1bc,not 4bc. But that is only a small part of his evidence.
Now,if someone only watched the introduction to The Star of Bethlehem” then Larson only mentions what previous theories were,ie. “an exploding star” being one of them. Larson completely discounts that and then goes on to tell the story of his research and what it reveals. You would need to watch the whole thing to get the right view. Just because someone says they watched it and disagrees with it,are we all supposed to just take this strangers word? Just because it fits with your idea of a comet being more feasible? I tell you what,I will watch the whole Metaxis interview,if you watch the whole Larson documentary? And then let’s compare notes. That’s the fair way is it not,to weigh both sides of an issue? I await your response.
David L,
You know David, you ought to at least first listen to the interview and listen to what this expert and author has to say before you go all-in for the Star of Bethlehem documentary theory just because you happen to be the one that put up the link.
I never said Professor Nicholl said the Star of Bethlehem documentary was about an exploding star. That was my own presumption because a planetary conjunction theory is even more implausible to me than a supernova.
Nicholl did not misrepresent the work of Larson at all.
The problem is not so much the dating, the theory does not fit the narrative given by Luke or Revelation 12. I already told you that Nicholl was given the Star of Bethlehem documentary but he could not buy into it for reasons that he says in the interview and in his book. That is why he spent 4 1/2 years of his life trying to figure out what really was the case.
Strangers word??? This guy is a biblical scholar and his book has been endorsed by foremost scholars in Christianity and astronomy, what is Larson? It is not like he just disagrees with Larson because he wants to disagree. He spent 4 1/2 years of his life doing the research and hard work to come up with a solid theory about what it was that the Magi saw.
Look David, if you want to believe in a theory that most of the experts are not buying into that is your prerogative, but don’t expect me and others to waste our time on theories that do not fit the narrative in Luke.
When people do not agree with everything that you buy into don’t take it so personally. It has nothing to do with you. The weight of the evidence will decide which theory is more likely to be correct.
I do not need to watch the Star of Bethlehem documentary because like Nicholl, I do not think any such theory can possibly fit the narrative. I do not have the bandwidth or the time to just watch videos to watch videos. Others can decide for themselves where the preponderance of the evidence lies if they are so inclined to do so.
For those who care. Here is an evaluation of the Star of Bethlemhem documentry DVD from independent biblical expert source.
https://answersingenesis.org/holidays/christmas/an-evaluation-of-the-star-of-bethlehem-dvd/
Don,
I’m shocked and dismayed that you believe the so called “experts” because I would have thought you would at least want to know whether they are true Christians in the first place. Are all university “experts” now to be believed as the default.
I found reviews that disagree with your “expert” who have said “what comet”? Even you said it. But that’s ok, the date is problematic,and no historical evidence. But go on and believe in this “expert” who also believes the archangel Micheal is the restrainer in Thessalonians 2. I have read enough from many of the “most respected experts” in academia,and always found them to be wrong on even the most basic theology. So,perhaps you should add all these “experts” to your list of helpful links?
Now,there are a plethora of theories,and even others who believe a comet was the star,but the fact remains that the word for comet and star are NOT the same in the original language. But don’t let that stop you either.
Now,as for Larson,he also spent years researching this,and the hit piece by those you chose to support your theory,I have read years ago,and find it to be largely demagogic. Did you even look at one positive review? I doubt it. So I won’t waste any more time trying to convince you or anyone else for that matter. And I don’t take it personally,because I’m just saddened at your intransigence,and the fact you are so quick to believe this professor,that you know so little about. Do a little research of your own on this guy,….that is if you can afford a few mb of data.)-:
David L,
You’re really pissing me off.
if you had any discernment at all and you would have listen to what this guy has to say and you would know that he was a Christian. Just because people do not agree with everything that you want to believe does not mean they are not Christians.
I guess you forgot that I also came to the conclusion that the restrainer in Thessalonians 2 is Micheal.
http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/the-restrainer-of-2th-27-is-not-the-spirit-filled-church.html
I am not the only person that came to that conclusion. Everything is not as cut and dry as you think. Where were your outstanding arguments against what I said when I posted that article?
You seem to think all of the experts are wrong but the so called expert that you believe in? Who make you the foremost expert of experts?
Comet and Stars were not the same word in the Bible you said? I say that is a pretty stupid argument. In Biblical times comets were not even identified separate from stars. Show me the word comet in the Bible?
What really pisses me off is that your so quick to judge this guy’s Christianity and his theory without even hearing him or knowing his arguments. You are so entrenched in believing your own version of the truth that you resort to attacking personalities that do not see your version of the truth as the only possible truth.
I read a review by someone that was a critic of Nicholl’s theory. That is–he was a critic until he read the book. Like some of us he could not believe the 6 BC birth date. After reading the book he is convinced that Nicholl made the case that it was a comet. He looked for another possible date that would also fulfill what Nicholl said and he came up with Sept 11 3BC. I don’t know if what he said is true but that date would make more sense.
Now from another source. I get the message that the Feast of Tabernacles was on 11 Sept 3 BC. And from a different perspective this is also thought to have been the birth date of Jesus by some. The article also mentions the fulfillment of Revelation 12 just as Nicholl’s theory does.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/was-jesus-born-sept-11-3-b-c/
Hi Don,
I sent you an email because I don’t think I could upload a picture of my notes. And a PDF file you may find interesting.
I will look at the links you sent,and reply shortly.
Thanks for taking the time to look at other views.
Apostle Paul taught in Galatians that Christians are free In Christ to choose what to celebrate, whether or not to Feast, what we should or should not eat and drink, new moons, keep Sabbath, because these things are just a shadow of the things to come. He mentioned that if our hearts do not condemn us, then we are free to partake. However, he also taught that although all things are permissible, not all things are profitable or spiritually beneficial.
So, it appears that believers have a license to decide for themselves on such matters. Evidently, we are not to judge other’s choices, nor allow others to judge our decisions.
Paul said, in whatever we choose to do, we should be fully persuaded and not be condemned in our hearts. We are Free, In Christ, to celebrate Christmas, and we are Free, In Christ, not to celebrate Christmas.
I choose not to celebrate Christmas, because for me, I do not believe the Jesus Christ of Christmas truly represents the Genuine Jesus Christ, the Son of the LIVING God of the Bible. Our God is the God of the Living. He’s Alive, and full of power, and getting ready to return to establish his Kingdom in power and glory and authority. He’s not a perpetual helpless baby, wrapped in the arms of Mother Mary, year after year after year. Jesus Christ of the bible taught his disciples remember him in his DEATH and resurrection, not his birth.
I believe Christmas misrepresents the true God of sound doctrine. I’m also pretty sure none of us will be celebrating Christmas in the future thousand year millennium. Based on these convictions, I choose not to partake.
That said, I do not begrudge or condemn other people who do not have the same convictions that I have. Most of my family members enjoy the season, without one bit of conviction. They are Spiritually saved, born again believers who believe the bible is God’s Word. They have LEARNED to respect my decision; although they still judge me and call me a Grinch. Oh Well.
I will admit that my inner Grinch does pop out on occasion, but I too am learning to rein her in, because she’s ugly.
That’s the beauty of being In Christ.
Cheers!
@The Golden Rule – Thank you for your response. It was very well stated. In fact, I would like to share a link from ProphecyTracker.org that points to Jesus’ death at His birth that was very helpful to me personally and supports that we are to remember His death and resurrection. While I understood the wise men’s gifts, it was the shepherds sign that was always a bit of a puzzle to me.
http://prophecytracker.org/2015/12/and-this-shall-be-a-sign-unto-you-3/.
Thank you again for your response – It encouraged me! 🙂
don this a note i left with chris at nort re dec 25 i believe this could have some merit but it may more likely be connected to hannikah which was the festival of lights when Jesus [yashua] said I AM the Light john
John,
I am not sure what you are saying. Also leave the website block blank if you have none.
don GOD does every thing according to his plan and at His time. some say hqnukkah is not in the bible but at john 10:22 He was at the Feast of Dedication also called the Feast of Lights. i dont find it at all strange for the Light of the world to come into the world at that time. john
don ps im an old codger [80] and i worked with Don Koenig in santa clara ca in 1970s any chance john
John,
Maybe, but was it at the Lord’s birth or when he was conceived in Mary’s womb? I believe the temple light was known as the light of the world.
I never worked in Santa Clara. There are a lot of Koenig’s around and even a number of them are named Don.
good morning don john 8:12. re Yashuas birth. i revvied some of your comments and see you had some views about tishrei 1. if you google ‘Bo- Two New Years – Nisan and Tishrei’ and read the part about Justice and Mercy. i found this useful in trying to collate Pashach [spring feasts][GODs mercy completed] and Sukkot [fall feasts][GODs justice to come]. also Hannukah [tevet-10th mo] GOD bless you and yours, john s
I also believe that the Lord Jesus was most likely conceived on Dec 25th (doesn’t life start at conception?). But I do understand
why some do not like to celebrate Christmas. For myself I think of Christmas as symbolic. I like to think of the Christmas Tree
as the tree of life. Centered in the middle with all having equal access. Under this tree is a beautifully wrapped present for
every person on earth. Unfortunately, you have many groups of people. The first group scoffs, thinking they are too smart to
fall for such a scam. The second group comes to the party to make fun of those who believe in this nonsense. The third group
comes to the party only to keep partying because surely the fun will end when they open up the free gift. The fourth group
comes and finds their gift. They look at this magnificent gift and say “I am not worthy to open such a beautiful gift. I will depart and
do good works. When I have worked hard enough to be worthy – surely someone will then bring me my gift.” The remnant that remains opens
their free gift happily and willingly. They marvel at the simplicity of it all. All they had to do was believe God rather than believing
in God. They believed the gospel of Grace ( 1 Corinthians 15 ) plus nothing (faith plus nothing). Anyway, just thought I would share a
different way of looking at Christmas.
If we are daily setting our minds “on things that are above, where Christ IS, seated at the right hand of God”, who needs Christmas? And yet, many find it can enhance their appreciation of the Lord. There’s room for freedom here.
Personally, the whole “Christmas season” thing becomes forced and insincere at some point, just from sheer overload. I work in the courier business so it’s a crescendo of pressure to the end of year. We are blocked from taking any time off. There are no office parties, just WORK!
This leaves me looking for peace and quiet, not folderol. So my introverted self retreats. I get together with family on Christmas Day and then head back home for quiet.
Gift giving can be fun, but I like to do that throughout the year for friends and family. At Christmas it reaches critical mass and it feels obligatory, not free. Again, if we’re daily sharing in life, who needs to prove anything at Christmas?
Just some thoughts from an oddball who likes smaller, quieter interaction vs. the group.
The early church did not celebrate birthdays. This includes their birthdays, their parents birthdays, the birthdays of their children or church congregations. They most certainly did not celebrate Christ’s birthday. This may seem strange to us today but there was nothing weird at all to the early church about not celebrating a birthday. Birthdays were observed, meaning it was noted a person was a full year older, but no fancy celebration was held annually solely for the purpose of birthday commemoration.
They were not accustomed to the practice like we are today which is why no one would get there feelings hurt back in the early church if they were not wished a happy birthday. The whole debate of whether or not Christ was born on Christmas Day is a mute point to the subject.
The only individuals that celebrated a birthday at that time were the pagans as they lauded the birthing process as part of the divine and an object of worship. They therefore would always throw elaborate parties to mark the day of ones birth. The other communities not influenced by the pagan worldview were not accustomed to this practice.
I do not celebrate my birthday or another’s birthday nor do I celebrate Christmas. I see no commandment to celebrate a birth (the feasts do not discuss birthday celebrations). I do not care if you do choose to celebrate birthdays. If you enjoy the practice and love big parties then by all means throw the largest one you can. It does not concern me if you celebrate birthdays or not.
Hi CJ,
This is no ordinary birth day. Christians should be celebrating that God tabernacled with humans. The birth of Jesus actually occurred on the Feast of Tabernacles but He was conceived in Mary’s womb around December 25th of that year.
Even so, in the church I go to people’s birthdays and anniversaries are celebrated first thing every Sunday but Communion is celebrated only a couple of times a year. That really does bug me.