Fewer and fewer things are recognized universally by all humanity in 2019. One that still remains, however, is that Dec. 25 is celebrated (or at least known) all over the world as Christmas, the day attributed as when Christ was born.
However, one might ask in all honesty, how do we know that Jesus was really born on such a date? And if he wasn’t born on Dec. 25, have we been living a lie all this time?
Absent any specific date from Scripture, scholars have in recent centuries been questioning, albeit rather quietly and politely, whether Dec. 25 is accurate as to the birth date of Jesus Christ, raising certain details in the story of Christ’s birth that would seem to negate the Dec. 25 date.
One of the most often cited of such details is in Luke 2:8, where reference is made of shepherds tending their flocks at night on the eve of Christ’s birth. In the cold winter months, sheep would not normally be brought outside at night. Rather, such a practice would be more common in the spring lambing season.
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
It comes as a surprise to most Christians that the New Testament itself makes no mention of commemorating the birth anniversary of Christ.
In fact, another second century AD early church father, Origen of Alexandria, condemned the celebration of birth anniversaries as a whole, being based on Ancient Roman pagan traditions.
The earliest extant source that attempts to put an exact date in relation to the birth of Christ is from about 200 AD, from Clement of Alexandria’s work Stromateis, wherein he refers to various different dates being held by people in the church during that time as to Christ’s birth. But even here, no mention is made of Dec. 25.
Rather, such dates as April 20 and May 20 were considered, either of which would favor the spring theory.
It seems apparent that insofar as the early church was concerned, the celebration of the date when Christ was born did not seem to be part of mainstream church life and worship.
Moreover, when we read of how people introduced themselves in those days, they would typically mention their parentage, place of birth, and even citizenship, but interestingly they commonly excluded their date of birth.
Could there be something theological afoot here? We do know of two other annual “commemorations” practiced by the New Testament church: Communion, and Easter, the former instituted by Christ himself and the latter a natural consequence of the world-changing phenomenon of the resurrection.
These two, however, are interestingly centered around Christ’s death, not his birth. And I think this is nothing accidental.
Christmas as we know it today has become more like a cultural event, rather than the religious observation it started out to be, with the additions of Santa Claus, elves, mistletoes, etc.
It is more difficult, however, to make similar additions to the crucifixion and the resurrection. These somber and sobering occasions simply do not lend themselves easily to cultural and commercial appropriation, as opposed to Christmas.
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
Hence, one can say that Communion and Easter hit more directly at the exclusive claims of Christianity, much more apparent than the day God came down to earth and put on human flesh.
Christians don’t need to celebrate the birth anniversary of Christ on Dec. 25, but we are free to do so in faith.
Absent a clear prohibition from Scripture, we are definitely not in disobedience or sin when we commemorate the virgin birth on a date that in all likelihood may be way off from the actual date of the incarnation.
So we can still greet each other this December a Merry Christmas, with our hearts and consciences in complete peace and good faith.
______________________________________
Author’s email: [email protected]
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});