When talking about the date of Christmas, people routinely
will tell you that we don’t know when Jesus was born, but we celebrate
Christmas in December because it’s the church’s response to the popular pagan Roman
holiday of Saturnalia. The “Jesus Myth” theory, which says that Jesus never
actually lived but that his story was stolen from paganism, takes this one step
further and argues that along with Saturnalia, the birth of Mithras, Sol
Invictus (the Unconquered Sun) and a host of other dying and rising solar
deities were all celebrated on or near December 25; the church ripped off these
stories as it invented the life of Jesus.
This is all nonsense if you actually look at the historical
evidence.
The early church didn’t celebrate Jesus’ birth, and until
the third century there was no real interest in the date. (This by itself
should put the lie to the idea that Jesus is nothing more than a borrowed sun
deity—if he was, you’d expect the date to be established very early.) In the
third century, some church leaders began trying to figure out the date of his
birth, with May 20 being a popular choice. In the mid-fourth century, either
December 25 in the West or January 6 in the East emerged as the consensus dates
for celebrating Jesus’ birth.
So how did they come up with those dates?
Although a few early Christian writers noted a connection
between the solstice and Jesus’ birth, none make any connection to pagan myths,
which is rather surprising if that was the point of the date. In fact, the idea
that our date for Christmas was influenced by pagan festivals only appears in
the twelfth century, 800 years or so after the event. No contemporary evidence
suggests that Saturnalia or the birth of sun gods had anything to do with
Jesus’ birth.
In actuality, the date of Christmas is connected to the date
of Good Friday. Jesus died on 14 Nisan in the Jewish lunar calendar; this got
translated to March 25 in the Roman solar calendar. An anonymous fourth century
treatise argues that Jesus entered the world (i.e. was conceived) on the same
day that he died; the feast of the Annunciation was thus set to March 25, which
made the date for his birth December 25.
In the East, the Crucifixion was dated to April 6—which is
nine months from January 6, their date for Christmas.
The idea that there is a connection between Jesus’
conception and death probably came from Jewish thought. Jewish rabbis believed
that the world was created in the month of Nisan, the patriarchs were born in
Nisan, Passover occurred in Nisan, and the redemption of the Jews at the end of
the era would also occur in Nisan. This thinking seems to have informed early
Christian theologians as they pondered the relationship between Jesus’ birth
and death.
Correlation does not mean causation: just because Jesus’ birth
was celebrated at the same date as pagan festivals does not mean that there is
a connection between the two, especially since there is no evidence of such a
connection in the sources. The Jewish background to Christianity and the
connection with the Crucifixion is a much better explanation for both of the
dates when Christmas was celebrated than any supposed connection to paganism.
All that is very interesting. I've heard people say that Jesus could not have been born in December since shepherds were taking watch of their flock in the countryside. These people argue that Jesus was rather born in September. What do you think of that theory ?
ReplyDeleteShepherds were out in the fields at a number of points during the year. I usually hear spring rather than September, but it's not at all clear that they couldn't have been out in the winter as well. We simply don't know. I don't think that point would exclude a December date, though from what I've read it does seem to make it less likely.
ReplyDeleteI remember, years ago, when I first started dabbling in the writings of the Ante-Nicene Fathers, I came across someone who wrote that the birth of Jesus was probably in either March or April. I don't remember who wrote this. I read a lot of documents from antiquity online. A lot from the Catholic Encyclopedia. It may have been Clement of Alexandria. In that case he would have said it was in either April or May.
Delete