Thorough refutation of the "Christmas has pagan roots" nonsense we keep hearing of today.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2971709/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2971709/posts
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Christmas Date: Not what you thought
- Thread starter shodan
- Start date
This supposed bit of Jewish folklore than a prophet is expected to die on the anniversary of his conception is news to me. I have not heard it before. The folklore about various OT prophets does not make reference to this phenomenon. Indeed, if it had even occurred repeatedly every prophet would have been enormously careful some three months after celebrating his birthday - but there is no such practice.
On the other hand, in the Holy Land, shepherds do not keep flocks outdoors at night in late December.
Among the ancient Jews, although there is mention (in the Talmud) of the dates of death there is very seldom mention of a date of birth. Birthdays do not seem so important to the ancient Jews. So it may have been the same with Jesus, and efforts to provide a calendar date for his birth were a matter of guesswork decades or even centuries later, with no real evidence to work with.
On the other hand, in the Holy Land, shepherds do not keep flocks outdoors at night in late December.
Among the ancient Jews, although there is mention (in the Talmud) of the dates of death there is very seldom mention of a date of birth. Birthdays do not seem so important to the ancient Jews. So it may have been the same with Jesus, and efforts to provide a calendar date for his birth were a matter of guesswork decades or even centuries later, with no real evidence to work with.
Nonsense.
"Equally so was the belief that He (the birth of Messiah) was to be revealed from Migdal Eder, the 'tower of the flock.' This Migdal Eder was not the watch-tower for the ordinary flocks which pastured on the barren sheep ground beyond Bethlehem, but lay close to the town, on the road to Jerusalem. A passage in the Mishnah leads to the conclusion that the flocks, which pastured there, were destined for the temple-sacrifices, and, accordingly, that the shepherds, who watched over them, were not ordinary shepherds. The latter were under the ban of Rabbinism on account of their necessary isolation from religious ordinances, and their manner of life which rendered strict legal observance unlikely, if not impossible. The same Mishnic passage also leads us to infer that these flocks lay out all the year round, since they are spoken of as in the fields thirty days before the Passover--that is in the month of February when in Palestine the average rainfall is nearly greatest." Edersheim
Interesting to look back at the first page of this thread. This issue still boils to: What are we doing giving credence to traditions promulgated by the oldest cult in the world--still over a billion strong?
Fact: Constantine the Great one, a pagan Roman Emperor, in the 4th century melded an apostasized group of so-called Christians with a group of existing pagans in an unholy marriage of Church and State--over a billion of which still survive.
Anything which has come out of this unholy matrimony is seriously corrupted including the reformations thereof.
Reformed apostasy is still apostasy reformed.
"come out from among them saith The Lord, touch not the unclean thing" is still in effect.
Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Bro. James
Fact: Constantine the Great one, a pagan Roman Emperor, in the 4th century melded an apostasized group of so-called Christians with a group of existing pagans in an unholy marriage of Church and State--over a billion of which still survive.
Anything which has come out of this unholy matrimony is seriously corrupted including the reformations thereof.
Reformed apostasy is still apostasy reformed.
"come out from among them saith The Lord, touch not the unclean thing" is still in effect.
Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Bro. James
John Yurich
Member
It is true that the secular aspect of Christmas is pagan. But the religious aspect of Christmas which is the Birth of Jesus is not pagan. And therefore even though Jesus was most likely not born on 25 December it is not wrong to celebrate His Birth on 25 December.
On what evidence do you base that opinion?
John Yurich
Member
The fact that the Bible does not specifically give a date for Jesus birth.
If it was that important - then we would have been told.
John Yurich
Member
The fact that the wisemen(more than 3) came and gave homage and worship to the newborn Jesus means that celebrating the Birth of Jesus is scriptural regardless if it is celebrated on 25 December.
So how does that prove He was not born in late December?
John Yurich said: ↑
The fact that the Bible does not specifically give a date for Jesus birth.
So how does that prove he was not born on 4 Jul?
The fact that the Bible does not specifically give a date for Jesus birth.
So how does that prove he was not born on 4 Jul?
How does what prove? Did somebody offer proof He was born on July 4? I must have missed it.
Because December was not a month in 4 BCE. [emoji41] [emoji109] [emoji2] [emoji844]
What is sad is that we, Christians, do not celebrated Yeshua's death, burial and resurrection on Passover, which is the more accurate time, rather than a pagan fertility date.
But we can determine the date pretty closely. There are several bible pointers that give us the general date.
From a website:
Much evidence exists. If God intended for us to celebrate Christ’s birthday, He would have had the scriptures record the time of His birth, as well as the location. The exact date is not known, yet evidence points to an autumn birth.
Luke 2:8 provides the first indication, as flocks were still in the fields at night. The flocks were brought in for the winter season of mid-October to mid-March.
Another indication is the fact that Jesus was born six months after John the Baptist (Luke 1:24-26, 36). The question then becomes, when was John the Baptist conceived? Because Zacharias’ priestly functions were carried out during the course of Abijah, at the time of the angel’s appearance (Luke 1:5-20), John’s conception occurred in mid-June, as verses 23-24 indicate. Thus, he would have been born in about mid-March. Therefore, Christ’s birth had to be in early autumn.
There is one additional clue. At the time of Christ’s birth, the area of Jerusalem was very crowded with visitors, because of the celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles. People took advantage of this journey to Jerusalem to pay their taxes (see Luke 2:1-5), as they were collected at this time of the year. Leviticus 23:24-40 proves that the seventh month was the time in question. When we combine Luke 2:1-5 and John 7:2-10 we see evidence of Jesus’ parents traveling to Jerusalem for the spring and fall Holy Days.
While there is virtually no evidence of Christ being born on December 25, there is abundant evidence of an early autumn birth. The world celebrates Christ’s birth in a winter pagan “season,” when, in fact, our Savior was born during a fall festival season that actually pictures the salvation of mankind.
Your first point proves to be in error.
"Equally so was the belief that He (the birth of Messiah) was to be revealed from Migdal Eder, the 'tower of the flock.' This Migdal Eder was not the watch-tower for the ordinary flocks which pastured on the barren sheep ground beyond Bethlehem, but lay close to the town, on the road to Jerusalem. A passage in the Mishnah leads to the conclusion that the flocks, which pastured there, were destined for the temple-sacrifices, and, accordingly, that the shepherds, who watched over them, were not ordinary shepherds. The latter were under the ban of Rabbinism on account of their necessary isolation from religious ordinances, and their manner of life which rendered strict legal observance unlikely, if not impossible. The same Mishnic passage also leads us to infer that these flocks lay out all the year round, since they are spoken of as in the fields thirty days before the Passover--that is in the month of February when in Palestine the average rainfall is nearly greatest." Edersheim
Uh, well, actually, no.
John the Baptist's father was said to serve in the Temple and was of the course of Abia, one of the twenty-four classes or courses of priests according to 1 Chron 24.
Each course served for one week, twice a year. During the special sabbaths all of the courses served.
It was while he was serving in the Temple that the announcement of the birth of John was made to him. Elizabeth conceived after his course of duty in the Temple.
John was six months older then the Lord.
When did the course of Abiah serve? According to the Misna, from the third week to the fourth week of September. So, if John was conceived in late September, he would have been born 9 months later, in late June. If Christ was six months younger, He would have been born in late December!
Actually they came to Bethlehem.
I think you got your abiyah timing wrong:Your first point proves to be in error.
"Equally so was the belief that He (the birth of Messiah) was to be revealed from Migdal Eder, the 'tower of the flock.' This Migdal Eder was not the watch-tower for the ordinary flocks which pastured on the barren sheep ground beyond Bethlehem, but lay close to the town, on the road to Jerusalem. A passage in the Mishnah leads to the conclusion that the flocks, which pastured there, were destined for the temple-sacrifices, and, accordingly, that the shepherds, who watched over them, were not ordinary shepherds. The latter were under the ban of Rabbinism on account of their necessary isolation from religious ordinances, and their manner of life which rendered strict legal observance unlikely, if not impossible. The same Mishnic passage also leads us to infer that these flocks lay out all the year round, since they are spoken of as in the fields thirty days before the Passover--that is in the month of February when in Palestine the average rainfall is nearly greatest." Edersheim
Uh, well, actually, no.
John the Baptist's father was said to serve in the Temple and was of the course of Abia, one of the twenty-four classes or courses of priests according to 1 Chron 24.
Each course served for one week, twice a year. During the special sabbaths all of the courses served.
It was while he was serving in the Temple that the announcement of the birth of John was made to him. Elizabeth conceived after his course of duty in the Temple.
John was six months older then the Lord.
When did the course of Abiah serve? According to the Misna, from the third week to the fourth week of September. So, if John was conceived in late September, he would have been born 9 months later, in late June. If Christ was six months younger, He would have been born in late December!
Actually they came to Bethlehem.
The Course of Abija