Interesting new info concerning Christmas and the birth of Christ

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: TWA0918
a reply to: TzarChasm

Yes. Just one view among many. But the only one scientifically verifiable as the source of these dates.

but still jesus wasnt born on the solstice.

My belief is that he never existed at all. This post is about the tradition, not the character of Jesus.

originally posted by: TWA0918

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: TWA0918
a reply to: TzarChasm

Yes. Just one view among many. But the only one scientifically verifiable as the source of these dates.

but still jesus wasnt born on the solstice.

My belief is that he never existed at all. This post is about the tradition, not the character of Jesus.

his birthday is only minimally related to his character. and his birthday is the whole point of the op. did you read it?

a reply to: TzarChasm

Of course I read it. And I meant character as in fictional person in a story. Not his personal traits. The post is about the origins of the tradition of Christmas and why Christians celebrate it on that day. There is a boatload of speculation about the date of his birth and they link this speculation to the post but is just a bunch of useless chatter IMO. Why haven't neutral, non Christian, historians found out when a guy who roamed around performing mass feats of magic and healing people was born? You'd think that may peak the interest of any self respecting scholar.

a reply to: TWA0918

The winter solstice, being the shortest day of the year, followed by days of increasing length, is the day that light begins gaining power over the darkness and cold.

Actually, the solstice (shortest day of the year) lasts for three days. They are all equally 'short.' After THOSE THREE DAYS, the length of days become longer.

That's why the solstice is 3 days BEFORE 'Christmas' - because the sun stays at its southern-most point on the horizon for that long. Then on the 25th-ish, the sun resumes its 'migration' northward (the planet Earth moves, not the sun).

One also has to think about the 'three days in the grave' thing before the 'resurrection'.

While I empathize with the OP's sensibilities, he's wrong.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

"Interesting New Info"?
Please.

Now before you decide to attempt to debunk his theory see what he has to say

'Attempt'?
Yeah, I saw what he had to say. It's apologetics plain and simple. And it's been debunked for decades.



I'm sorry that you are disappointed to learn these things - but the 'non-Christian' celebrations of astronomical phenomena are DEFINITELY the source of the 'dates' chosen by the church to celebrate special "jesus" days. For heaven's sake, man. Get with the 21st century.

Call me a 'smarty-pants pseudo-scholar' if you want, I don't mind.
That doesn't change the fact that you are misled and mistaken. Wrong. But - it's not your fault - the church has an iron grip on people who don't know better - yet.

a reply to: TWA0918

Why haven't neutral, non Christian, historians found out when a guy who roamed around performing mass feats of magic and healing people was born? You'd think that may peak the interest of any self respecting scholar.

It piques the interest of ALL self-respecting scholars. But there is NO INFORMATION so far (perhaps there was one day long ago, but no more). We DO know how those dates got incorporated into Church calendars though - it's just that the apologists refuse to believe it. So they continue with their campaign.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I'm a bit confused by what you have to say. So you agree that the dates are based on astrological events. You say the three days and resurrection are based upon the Sun's movements in the sky,Which I also believe. But you believe that there may have been evidence of Jesus's birth at one point? You believe he existed? Or am I misinterpreting you?

a reply to: TWA0918

But you believe that there may have been evidence of Jesus's birth at one point? You believe he existed? Or am I misinterpreting you?

No, there is no evidence. I don't know if he existed or not - but I lean toward 'not' - .

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: TWA0918

But you believe that there may have been evidence of Jesus's birth at one point? You believe he existed? Or am I misinterpreting you?

No, there is no evidence. I don't know if he existed or not - but I lean toward 'not' - .

there are plenty of records. if a book about jesus as a man were handed to me, i would be much more inclined to accept it. because it is not a stretch of the imagination to think that a philosopher named jesus once existed. but christmas is a predominantly pagan celebration hijacked by the roman empire.

none of these religious figures ever existed
the whole religion thing is just sheeple control for the idle rich:
Jesus Christ = riCh Jest us ( count the letters)

our " lord amen" was actually the first "phi rho" of the united upper and lower Egypt
(uh...that's " pharaoh ", the Egyptians played loose with their written vowels)
as above so below...eh...wot?

its all a scam
like black friday
www.cbc.ca...
and so of course too now a-days, so are boxing day sales

originally posted by: TWA0918
a reply to: DeathSlayer

I actually have already done my research into the subject. Having been raised in a heavily Christian family I was very skeptical of the argument that Jesus is just another in a long list of solar representations. His reference is to a Christian website that provided no real source from anything beyond speculative Christian teachers and philosophers. In fact the final paragraph in the article he used is:

In the end we are left with a question: How did December 25 become Christmas? We cannot be entirely sure. Elements of the festival that developed from the fourth century until modern times may well derive from pagan traditions. Yet the actual date might really derive more from Judaism—from Jesus’ death at Passover, and from the rabbinic notion that great things might be expected, again and again, at the same time of the year—than from paganism. Then again, in this notion of cycles and the return of God’s redemption, we may perhaps also be touching upon something that the pagan Romans who celebrated Sol Invictus, and many other peoples since, would have understood and claimed for their own, too.

So...please give me a source that is based on real historical evidence.

Of course no one can be sure Jesus was born on December 25th - I thought the article gave a new spin on Christmas that most of us have not considered. The thread is not about debating the existence of Jesus. I already believe he exists.

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: DeathSlayer


Chris doesn't know what he is talking about. This pagan holiday thing has been gone over in total long before he came along. And yea Jeremiah did get on the Christmas tree deal and in such a way as to make it very hard not to understand what he is talking about.

I thought his new approach was intriguing. You must admit it makes one think.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

There are NO records of his existence dating from anywhere before 200 years after his alleged life took place. Please find one historical document from a credible neutral source. I'll wait...

Organized religion is a form of control. Plain and simple.

But he's right it's not about his existence. The tradition is the subject I apologize

a reply to: DeathSlayer

According to my research, Jesus was born on December 9th or 10th, depending on when the Vernal Equinox occurs.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: DeathSlayer

So the points are:
1. Evidence exists that indicates that Jesus was born on December 25th.
2. That December 25th is an authentic holiday, not of pagan origin.

Because I was brought up in a non-sectarian Christian religion that does not celebrate Christmas, I was taught from an early age that the rebirth of the sun festival was appropriated by Christendom as the birthday of Jesus. That was several decades ago. So this is not something that originated with social media.

no source claiming the Christians appropriated pagan days until the 12th century

So there are sources that documented the fact that Christianity did appropriate pagan holidays. But those sources did not exist until around the time of the Crusades. So, it was only when the Church decided to start slaughtering non-Christians, in God's name, did they start appropriating pagan holidays, presumably in order to ease the transition of the pagans into their new religion.
Ok. From an evidentiary perspective, I guess I'll accept that. However from a personal belief perspective, I think the Church was doing this long before it was documented.

even demonstrating how 12-5 was decided to be the date of Jesus’s birth

I assume the author meant 12-25.

Around 200 C.E. Tertullian of Carthage reported the calculation that the 14th of Nisan (the day of the crucifixion according to the Gospel of John) in the year Jesus diedc was equivalent to March 25 in the Roman (solar) calendar. March 25 is, of course, nine months before December 25; it was later recognized as the Feast of the Annunciation—the commemoration of Jesus’ conception.

So 200 years after Jesus birth they came to the conclusion that He was born on December 25th. At some point early Christians came to the conclusion that Jesus was conceived on March 25th and started celebrating that. How did they come to that conclusion?

I guess since it was an Immaculate Conception, that's not too weird. However, I suspect that my parents are the only ones that know approximately when I was conceived. And, it probably took more than one try. I'm certain that I would be most uncomfortable with people knowing when I was conceived. Who told them and why?


So, from what I can see in the article, I think the evidence is still a little slim that 12/25 is when Jesus was born. Because someone 200 years later decided Jesus was conceived on 3/25, so he must have been born on 12/25.

Even if the invention of 12/25 does predate paganism integration into Christianity, was 12/25 celebrated by the early Christians? Or was it just convenient to assign a special Christian day to already extant pagan holidays 10 centuries later?


dex

originally posted by: DeathSlayer

originally posted by: TWA0918
I guess the hundreds of religious characters sharing this date as a birthday is just a long list of coincidences?

It's because they're all just worship of the SUN.. not the SON. Pay special attention to the name of that treatise. It's labeled "On solstices and equinoxes" and it concerns the birth and resurrection. Do some research based on science and not written by people trying to defend their religion against it.

This is a poor response to the article above. The article above is referenced - have you checked the references out?

How quick you are to reject this information. Your not one of the those

smarty pants pseudo scholars calling Christmas a “pagan holiday.”

that Chris Putnam was talking about are you?

Where's your contemporaneous documentation proving that Jesus ever lived? You can't name a single person who lived when Jesus allegedly lived who wrote that s/he witnessed him living. That pretty much means you can't even prove he was born, thus knocking the bottom out of your claim for December 25. By contrast, solstices do exist.

originally posted by: trollz
a reply to: DeathSlayer

I expect you'll also be coming up with a legitimate reason why Easter is celebrated with colored eggs and rabbits?
Because, you know, that totally wasn't taken from earlier pagan religious celebrations. Jesus was totally about the colored eggs and rabbits.

Mary Magdalene had a pet rabbit?

originally posted by: TWA0918
a reply to: Praetorius

You claim just as the OP that Christmas is a Christian religion. But is in fact just ASTROLOGICAL events personified and celebrated by pagans. If I can find a list of those religious characters I mentioned I'll post it for ya.

The best parts of Christmas are pagan.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: TWA0918

But you believe that there may have been evidence of Jesus's birth at one point? You believe he existed? Or am I misinterpreting you?

No, there is no evidence. I don't know if he existed or not - but I lean toward 'not' - .

there are plenty of records. if a book about jesus as a man were handed to me, i would be much more inclined to accept it. because it is not a stretch of the imagination to think that a philosopher named jesus once existed. but christmas is a predominantly pagan celebration hijacked by the roman empire.

Actually, there are none. Not one thing was written about Jesus by anyone who lived when he allegedly lived.