Jesus was born of virgin Mary. No dispute in that. This was all God's work and HIS planning to save the man.
However, why is December 25 chosen to celebrate Christ's birthday through out the world?
|
Jesus was born of virgin Mary. No dispute in that. This was all God's work and HIS planning to save the man.
However, why is December 25 chosen to celebrate Christ's birthday through out the world?
Here is a lengthy but informative article that answers your question: CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Christmas
... scroll down to the yellowish highlighted area for "Origin of Date".
From the link above:
Origin of date
The gospels
Concerning the date of Christ's birth the Gospels give no help; upon their data contradictory arguments are based. The census would have been impossible in winter: a whole population could not then be put in motion. Again, in winter it must have been; then only field labour was suspended. But Rome was not thus considerate. Authorities moreover differ as to whether shepherds could or would keep flocks exposed during the nights of the rainy season.
Zachary's temple service
Arguments based on Zachary's temple ministry are unreliable, though the calculations of antiquity (see above) have been revived in yet more complicated form, e.g. by Friedlieb (Leben J. Christi des Erlösers, Münster, 1887, p. 312). The twenty-four classes ofJewish priests, it is urged, served each a week in the Temple; Zachary was in the eighth class, Abia. The Temple was destroyed 9 Ab, A.D. 70; late rabbinical tradition says that class 1, Jojarib, was then serving. From these untrustworthy data, assuming that Christ was born A.U.C. 749, and that never in seventy turbulent years the weekly succession failed, it is calculated that the eighth class was serving 2-9 October, A.U.C. 748, whence Christ's conception falls in March, and birth presumably in December. Kellner (op. cit. pp. 106, 107) shows how hopeless is the calculation of Zachary's week from any point before or after it.
Analogy to Old Testament festivals
It seems impossible, on analogy of the relation of Passover and Pentecost to Easter and Whitsuntide, to connect the Nativity with the feast of Tabernacles, as did, e.g. Lightfoot (Horæ Hebr, et Talm. II, 32), arguing from Old Testament prophecy, e.g. Zacharias 14:16 sqq.; combining, too, the fact of Christ's death in Nisan with Daniel's prophecy of a three and one-half years' ministry (9:27), he puts the birth in Tisri, i.e. September. As undesirable is it to connect 25 December with the Eastern (December)feast of Dedication (Jos. Ant. Jud. XII, vii, 6).
Natalis Invicti
The well-known solar feast, however, of Natalis Invicti, celebrated on 25 December, has a strong claim on the responsibility for our Decemberdate. For the history of the solar cult, its position in the Roman Empire, and syncretism with Mithraism, see Cumont's epoch-making "Textes et Monuments" etc. I, ii, 4, 6, p. 355. Mommsen (Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, 12, p. 338) has collected the evidence for the feast, which reached its climax of popularity under Aurelian in 274. Filippo del Torre in 1700 first saw its importance; it is marked, as has been said, without addition in Philocalus' Calendar. It would be impossible here even to outline the history of solarsymbolism and language as applied to God, the Messiah, and Christ in Jewish or Christian canonical, patristic, or devotional works. Hymns and Christmas offices abound in instances; the texts are well arranged by Cumont (op. cit. addit. Note C, p. 355).
The earliest rapprochement of the births of Christ and the sun is in Cyprian, "De pasch. Comp.", xix, "O quam præclare providentia ut illo die quo natus est Sol . . . nasceretur Christus." — "O, how wonderfully actedProvidence that on that day on which that Sun was born . . . Christ should be born."
In the fourth century, Chrysostom, "del Solst. Et Æquin." (II, p. 118, ed. 1588), says: "Sed et dominus noster nascitur mense decembris . . . VIII Kal. Ian. . . . Sed et Invicti Natalem appelant. Quis utique tam invictus nisi dominus noster? . . . Vel quod dicant Solis esse natalem, ipse est Sol iustitiæ." — "But Our Lord, too, is born in the month of December.. . The eight before the calends of January [25 December].. But they call it the 'Birthday of the Unconquered'. Who indeed is so unconquered as Our Lord.. Or, if they say that it is the birthday of the Sun, He is the Sun of Justice."
Already Tertullian (Apol., 16; cf. Ad. Nat., I, 13; Orig. c. Cels., VIII, 67, etc) had to assert that Sol was not the Christians' God; Augustine (Tract xxxiv, in Joan. In P.L., XXXV, 1652) denounces the heretical identification of Christ with Sol.
Pope Leo I (Serm. xxxvii in nat. dom., VII, 4; xxii, II, 6 in P.L., LIV, 218 and 198) bitterly reproves solar survivals — Christians, on the very doorstep of the Apostles' basilica, turn to adore the rising sun. Sun-worship has bequeathed features to modern popular worship in Armenia, where Christians had once temporarily and externally conformed to the cult of the material sun (Cumont, op. cit., p. 356).
But even should a deliberate and legitimate "baptism" of a pagan feast be seen here no more than the transference of the date need be supposed. The "mountain-birth" of Mithra and Christ's in the "grotto" have nothing in common: Mithra's adoring shepherds (Cumont, op. cit. I, ii, 4, p. 304 sqq.) are rather borrowed from Christian sources than vice versa.
Other theories of pagan origin
The origin of Christmas should not be sought in the Saturnalia (1-23 December) nor even in the midnight holy birth at Eleusis (see J.E. Harrison, Prolegom. p. 549) with its probable connection through Phrygia with the Naasene heretics, or even with the Alexandrian ceremony quoted above; nor yet in rites analogous to the midwinter cult at Delphi of the cradled Dionysus, with his revocation from the sea to a new birth (Harrison, op. cit. 402 sqq.).
The astronomical theory
Duchesne (Les origines du culte chrétien, Paris, 1902, 262 sqq.) advances the "astronomical" theory that, given 25 March as Christ's death-day [historically impossible, but a tradition old as Tertullian (Adv. Jud. 8)], the popular instinct, demanding an exact number of years in a Divine life, would place His conception on the same date, His birth 25 December. This theory is best supported by the fact that certain Montanists (Sozomen, Church History VII.18) kept Easter on 6 April; both 25 December and 6 January are thus simultaneously explained. The reckoning, moreover, is wholly in keeping with the arguments based on number and astronomy and "convenience", then so popular. Unfortunately, there is no contemporary evidence for the celebration in the fourth century of Christ's conception on 25 March.
Conclusion
The present writer in inclined to think that, be the origin of the feast in East or West, and though the abundance of analogous midwinter festivals may indefinitely have helped the choice of the December date, the same instinct which set Natalis Invicti at the winter solstice will have sufficed, apart from deliberate adaptation or curious calculation, to set the Christian feast there too.
It was chosen because there was a pagan holiday that the chiristians of the time did'nt want to to be celebrated, so they made a new one (well sort of made a new one): Christmas' pagan origins
It's kind of funny when you think about it, because Halloween, Valentines day, even Easter (though I'm fairly certain it was around a similar time as that's when passover is) were all once the days of pagan holidays.
Gernald is correct. The celebration of the SUN was turned into the celebration of the SON.
From what I heard the Christians hoped to 'convert' pagans by combining and celebrating Christmas and Easter with the pagan celebrations.
Thank you folks and special thanks to RickJ. Please keep posting if more is there to know.
I have heard the stories about other gods and deities who are said to be born on Dec 25 and from virgin mothers. There was a mythic Egyptian or Greek god (Sorry... forgot the name), who was said to be born of virgin mother, died and then rose from the deads. This thing I discard outrightly. Most surprising was when I was told with huge confidence that a Hindu god, Krishana, was born of virgin mother and his birthday is celebrated on Dec 25. And I know who are parents of this Krishana and his day of birth is celebrated in Oct or Nov but never in Dec. We really have to be cautious these days when Anti-Christ is gaining popularity and trying to disorient followers of Christ.
This was indeed the reason behind each occurrence. However I actually feel the thoughts of man in this world, are an ear shot away from satan. Scripture is clear in saying not to yoke yourself in any matter with strange teaching, and that by doing so you have placed yourself with risk to bondage in sin. ( just goes to show how well we listen)Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
My understanding is that Dec 24 is the evening before Mary left to visit her cousin Elizabeth. The evening in which the an angel appeared to say she would be the mother of the begotten Son of God. Thus Dec 25 when Mary did visit her cousin, the presents of Jesus within Mary was shown in Elizabeth's womb by her baby. And the revealed truth was given with the Holy Spirit in Elizabeth.
This date is calendar noted by Elizabeth's husband being on the course of his monthly duty as priest. The break down of each priests assigned duties and their course is written in scripture. Month by month information... ( Luke 1:5) (Luke 1:23) (Luke 1:36) assigned courses (1 Chronicles 24)
That allows us to understand that life began in Mary's womb on Dec 24, the eve of what the church has celebrated as Christmas Eve. And that 280 days from that date would bring us to September 29 as the birth of Emmanuel. The Jewish calendar of the 15TH of ETHANIM
This scripture notes the 6th month but you have to understand it is Hebrew calendar. So there are several noted facts of dates in scripture that can be recognized. I feel the Christian church today allows the misconception because of the their attempt previously to gain popularity by the pagan celebration.
Luke 1:26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth
Plus Luke 2:2 thr 2:7 give evidence to register of tax which was the first tax made by Cyrenius under the emperor Caesar Augustus Luke 2:1... The Roman government keep documents detailed in these registered families. And the scripture tells how Josepth went with Mary to register his family as demanded by this new law.
I have never searched the study of this information, but I don't see why the actually date can't be noted as fact to the actually birth born. (Luke 2:7)
Thanks Sndbay
When I think about it If it is a good thing to convert a pagan person to Christianity why not also a good thing to convert a pagan holiday to Christianity?
That's good enough for me.
Fred
Guess that depends on who you feel can convert the pagan..And the pagan holiday was not converted. It is what it was even today.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
I happen to put all strength and power into God. The Father from what Christ referenced: gives to HIM, whom the Father has chosen. Once someone in heart has shown God he desires to follow God's will. I feel then God reveal the measure of gift in accordance to His will.
The example we are to pagans is that we are Christian.. It would be advisable to be Christian without deception of any kind. They following us rather then we following them.
We do not want to take from paganism... it's the wrong tree
sndbay,
I believe that no one is converted to Christianity without the help of the Holy Spirit and that includes the conversion of pagan holidays.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
Also one of the issues we were told in seminary was that it was illegal in the early church to be a Christian, so often they used the pagan holidays to hide behind, they could celebrate their own holiday, have people over to their homes and it did not stand out.
If they chose the 14 of Decemember they would have to explain why they were having a celebration
Fr_Chuck,
Ah!!
That dies make sense.
Early Christians had to do much to hide themselves from the anti-Christian forces.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
What you have posted does make sense, "because of fear" then the truth was hidden.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
But do you agree that each time we hide our love for Christ out of fear of evil (similar to what Peter did) we should be sorry for that fear?
What better steps can we take today, which have come from those experiences in teaching us not to fear because Christ is with us.
The fear of death should be known as satan. In satan there is death.. In Christ there is life, and we believe in the living God and life eternal.
Those days are still here today, and I truly believe we must step forward to stand in what we hold stedfast in with Christ. Love.. Hope... Trust.. Strength..
In the end God asked that we speak of truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Hi Fred good morning to you,
Just to edify by what scripture offers us. There is a scripture in which Christ said we have the choice to convert to goodness. (Jam 5:20) Also a choice to convert as a child of God. (Matthew 18:3)
It is part of predestinent calling God offers us to come, and answer HIS calling. ( Matthew 11:28)
That is why I believe once we answer that call and do bow before HIS will. We have a heart of love in faith that continues in baptism to receive the Holy Spirit . Within Christ, is the revealed truth in accordance to HIS will. In the desire to follow Christ the door is open, He stands at that door waiting for anyone to welcome HIM. (Matthew 7:7 Luke 11:9)
(Note the " if " in this scripture which offers choice)
Matthew 16:24Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
sndbay,
Well said.
Fred
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:59 AM. |