And that's the point. Satan becomes far greater a foe in the minds of people when it's assumed he's in control and we retreat to our tiny corners and relinquish everything else to darkness. We are the Church Militant and we don't retreat, we advance and take back what was stolen. Music doesn't belong to Satan, movies don't belong to him, neither does the internet, nor pop culture trends. It's all ours for the taking when we remember that in Christ, we have already won.aspen said:
Christmas
- Thread starter joshhuntnm
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
[SIZE=medium]I sleep more because I get day off. Jesus was not born on that day and most likely not in December at all.[/SIZE]
Jesus was born in a time when most people didn't know their exact birthday. Sobering thought.Suhar said:
Christmas is a consumerist holiday now anyway.
And who is talking about fear?
I am not afraid of redeeming a pagan holiday - just more keen on celebrating ones that God already established.
And who is talking about fear?
I am not afraid of redeeming a pagan holiday - just more keen on celebrating ones that God already established.
Pilgrimer
Active Member
That’s actually not true. There is no historical record, not an ancient document or letter or an archaeological inscription or artifact, that shows that any pagan religion celebrated anything on December 25 before Christianity. The Christian evidence for that date as the celebration of the feast of the nativity dates back to within 50 years of the Apostles in three early documents:tripleseven said:
Theophilus Bishop of Caesarea (115-181 A.D.)wrote: "We ought to celebrate the birthday of our Lord on what day soever the 25th of December shall happen." (Magdeburgenses, Cent. 2. c. 6. Hospinian, de orign Festorum Chirstianorum)
Also Hippolytus (ca. 165 – 235 A.D.), in his commentary on Daniel 4:23 wrote: “The first coming of our Lord, that is in the flesh, in which he was born at Bethlehem, took place eight days before the Kalends of January …” (Eight days before the calends of January is December 25)
And another citation: Theophilus of Antioch (ca. 171 – 183 A.D.), in his discussion about the proper time to observe Easter states that the Gauls contended that just as they celebrated the birth of the Lord on December 25, regardless of what day of the week that fell on, so too Christians ought to celebrate Easter on March 25, regardless of what day of the week that fell on.
So there is ample evidence that the nativity of Jesus was being celebrated on December 25 from very shortly after the lifetime of the Apostles, whereas there is no historical evidence that any pagan religion celebrated anything on that date, not until long after Christianity had spread throughout the world.
While the Scriptures do not state what date Jesus was born, there is in fact a wealth of evidence presented in the Gospels that a careful comparison with historical and archaeological data will prove that the date held as that of the birth of Jesus since the beginning of Christianity is amply supported by the facts.
And what do you base that date on?tripleseven said:
Two comments:tripleseven said:
1) The festivals of the Old Covenant were “rehearsals” for the blessings of the New Covenant. The New Covenant is the fulfillment of what all those old feasts and fasts foreshadowed.
2) If you “celebrate the high holydays” of the Old Covenant then that means you are looking to a High Priest to enter the Holiest in a temple in Jerusalem to sprinkle the blood of a goat to make atonement for your sin. But since there is no priest, and no temple, and no atonement sacrifice offered according to the Old Covenant holy day of Atonement, then you have no atonement, you are still dead in your sin, separated from God, a stranger from the promises, and an alien from the commonwealth of the saints and the household of faith.
Perhaps you should give some more thought to where your hope springs from …
In Christ,
Pilgrimer
Pilgrimer
Active Member
I’m quite familiar with Saturnalia. It was one of the primary festivals of ancient Rome. Saturnalia was a holiday instituted in 217 B.C. to raise the morale of the Roman citizens after they suffered a crushing military defeat at the hands of the Cathaginians. The festival was celebrated for one day, on December 17. In later years it was extended to a week-long festival ending on December 22 so that it concluded on the winter solstice. Efforts to shorten the celebration were unsuccessful. Augustus tried to reduce it to three days, and Caligula to five. These attempts caused uproar among the Roman citizens.Suhar said:
The Saturnalia was never celebrated on December 25, that was a date unique to Christianity until the first adoption of a Christian holiday by pagans when Aurelian changed the celebration of "Dies Natalis Sol Invicti" from December 11 to December 25 in an attempt to paganize a Christian holiday that had become very popular among the Roman people as the Roman Empire saw multitudes of it's citizens convert to Christianity and throw off the superstitions of the old Roman gods of their fathers.
Christmas had nothing to do with Saturnalia, other than it fell 2 days after the Saturnalia had ended. And according to the writings of the Roman historian John the Lydian (born c. 490 A.D.) the Christian church “turned away” from these pagan festivals.
That is certainly the testimony of every other ancient writer. Indeed, up until the Edict of Milan published in 313 A.D., Christians were customarily persecuted by arrest, imprisonment, property confiscated, and the Christians themselves tortured and martyred by any number of barbarous means for refusing to compromise the Gospel and even pay token homage to the pagan gods of Rome.
The rumor that Christians “adopted” (insert any of a number of different pagan holidays) for our religious observances is patently and demonstrably false.
All the historical evidence supports the December 25 date for the nativity of Christ.
In Christ,
Pilgrimer
Pilgrimer
Active Member
The notion that 1st century Jews did not know or track the dates of their births is not true. Particularly for Jewish children, there are eight different names given to children to designate each year of the advancing stages of development of child life from birth (Chethub 60). But even more important is that Rabbinic law prescribed that at certain ages a child was to be engaged in certain activities. In the Mishnah (Aboth v. 21) it states: "Rabbi Jehudah, the son of Tema, says: At five years of age, reading of the Scriptures; at ten years of age, learning the Mishnah; at thirteen years, bound to the commandments (bar mitzvah); at fifteen years, the study of the Talmud; at eighteen years, marriage; at twenty, the pursuit of trade or business; at thirty years, full vigour (entry into priesthood for those qualified); at forty, maturity of reason; at fifty, for counsel; at sixty, commencement of agedness; at seventy, grey age; at eighty, advanced old age; at ninety, bowed down; at a hundred, as if he were dead and gone, and taken from the world."FHII said:
The point of all this was that it was necessary to know and track one's date of birth in order to know the correct age of a child and when certain activities were to be engaged in, and we know from the Talmudic literature that at least the important birthdays (such as a child being weaned or a bar mitzvah) were celebrated with a feast, if not every birthday. Why we think we are the only people who love our children enough to remember and celebrate their birth days is naïve presumption.
Now considering the miraculous nature of Jesus' birth, and the Jewish care given to each year of a child’s development, it is inconceivable that Mary would not remember when Jesus was born. And it is equally inconceivable that someone would not have asked her, probably Luke whose Gospel has more detail about Jesus' birth than any of the other Gospels, although Matthew also records things about Jesus' birth that only Mary could have related, at least originally.
The Gospels of Luke and Matthew were written in the 60's A.D., (if Mary was still alive she would have been in her 80’s if she bore Jesus around 15 years of age), and if the Gospel writers knew all these details about the birth of Jesus, then it is certainly plausible that the date of his birth was also known, even if at the time it seemed less important as the miraculous nature of it all. But Luke does date the nativity as to the year, so placing it in the historical context of the reign of emperors and kings and rulers.
It was only 55 years later that the Bishop of Caesarea lived and he wrote about what was apparently a dispute among the churches in Palestine about when to celebrate Jesus’ birthday. He said it should be on the 25th of December, whatever day that might fall on. Which means apparently some were arguing that it should be celebrated either on a certain day of the week (there is early mention of Jesus having been born on a Wednesday) or on a certain date of the Jewish calendar rather than the Julian calendar date.
But certainly December 25 as the birthday of Jesus is attested to very early, disputing all the popular theories that Christianity adopted some pagan celebration on that date in later centuries … the History Channel notwithstanding.
In Christ,
Pilgrimer
Pilgrimer
Active Member
Well, first of course would be what the Gospel accounts of Jesus' birth actually record, but we also have to take into account all the Scriptural information that sets limits and parameters to the nativity account.Suhar said:
Then there's the Jewish sources, primarily the Talmudic writings which go into extensive details about the moors and practices during 2nd temple period. But another primary source is Josephus, whose history is so detailed and accurate that archaeologists use it to help locate ancient sites, walls, gates, etc. The Jewish writer Philo also gives a lot of background information. And in recent decades there are the Dead Sea Scrolls which give us some insight into popular Jewish beliefs during this period of time.
Then there is the wealth of information from Roman historians, letters and documents.
And in modern times we have gained a tremendous amount of archaeological information that can also add to our understanding of references in the New Testament that are otherwise obscure and often misunderstood.
And finally, there's the astronomical tables that have their own tale to tell.
So the amount of evidence that can be brought to bear on this subject is quite extensive, and when everything that can currently be known is taken into consideration, the date held as that of the nativity of Jesus since antiquity is supported by all the evidence.
In Christ,
Pilgrimer
There is absolutely nothing in the Bible about the date and there is absolutely nothing in arhaeological record. If anything Bible proves that He was not born in December. Shepherds are not with sheep on pastures in DecemberPilgrimer said:
FHII
Well-Known Member
- Apr 9, 2011
- 4,833
- 2,494
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Interesting link.... Seems like it came about by either christianizing a pagan holiday or listening to old jewish fables. In any sense, Suhar... Not only the part about the shepherds in the field, but also that it was tax time.
http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/new-testament/how-december-25-became-christmas/
http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/new-testament/how-december-25-became-christmas/
Pilgrimer
Active Member
I didn't say the Bible gives a date, or that a date was found inscribed on some ancient document. I said the "evidence" from all these sources "supports" the December 25 date. Whereas there is no actual historical or archaeological evidence to support those who proffer other dates.Suhar said:
For example, the comment you made that shepherds would not be in the fields with their sheep in December ... there is no Scriptural or historical or archaeological or, for that matter, even meterological data to support that notion. Wherever you got that information, did they by any chance offer you any kind of evidence to prove that sheep would not be in the fields of Bethlehem in December? If so, I'd like to see it. But there is a lot of evidence, from Scripture as well as historical documents that proves that sheep would indeed have been in the fields in December, and in fact, all the year round.
First from Scripture, we have evidence from Genesis 31:38-40 that Jacob was in the fields tending Laban's flocks in both the drought of summer and also the frosty winter nights.
And from historical sources, there are two Rabbinic sources which state that during 2nd Temple times flocks “remain in the open alike in the hottest days and in the rainy season.” (Bezah 40a cf. Tosephta Bezah iv.6 and also Jer. Bezah 63b) The winter in Israel is referred to as the rainy season because this is a moderate region of the Mediterranean where the winter is mild and rainy compared to European winters, and even American winters in the northern states. After all, Israel is a land of palms, and fig trees, and pomegranates, plants which only grow in areas with moderate winter temperatures. The average nighttime temperature in Bethlehem on December 24 is 44 degrees F. I have actually seen temperatures on Christmas day in the 60’s. This is simply not a cold enough climate to require that wooly sheep be brought into shelter for the winter. To verify the temperature data I’ve provided log onto http://www.myweather2.com/City-Town/Israel/Bethlehem/climate-profile.aspx?month=12 or www.jerusalempost.com and search their archives.
But there is much more evidence that also must be taken into consideration. During the 1st century there were literally hundreds of thousands of animals sacrificed in the Temple every year. According to Josephus as many as a quarter million lambs were slain at Passover alone! Animals to be used for cultic purposes was the primary import commodity of Israel (Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus, Joachim Jeremias), and before these animals could be offered they had to be inspected by specially trained priests to be sure they were free of any blemish, deformity, scars, or infestations. According to Rabbinic writings (Mishnah, Baba K. 7.7 and Baba K. 80a) the “Temple flock,” as it was called referring to those flocks of sheep intended for sacrifice in Jerusalem, were kept at Bethlehem, five miles south of the city. This would not be a typical sheep fold, but a stock-yard type arrangement where hundreds and even thousands of animals were temporarily kept until they were inspected and then brought to Jerusalem for sacrifice. And since Jesus was born on the 7th day of Chanukah, during the festival of lights, there would have been a greater demand for sacrificial animals than on a non-festival day so certainly there would have been animals in the fields ready to be brought the 5 miles to the city for the next day’s sacrifices.
Another important piece of data, this time of particular archaeological interest, is that Bethlehem was the ancient site of the royal house of David, and there was at one time a castle there. Even in Jesus’ time that castle had long since fallen to ruin, but it is believed that the “Migdal Eder,” the “tower of the flock” which was located in the old ancient royal village was in fact one of the old watchtowers from the royal castle that in Jesus’ time was being used as the watchtower for the shepherds who were keeping watch over the temple flock. The Palestinian authority has been peppered with requests for permits to conduct archaeological investigations in this area to attempt to locate the castle ruins, but permission has not yet been given. We know that this Migdal Eder stood just outside Bethlehem on the road to Jerusalem.
A messianic prophecy about this Migdal Eder was very familiar to 1st century Jews. The prophet Micah had foretold that the birth of the Messiah would be announced from this tower: “And thou, O tower of the flock, the strong hold of the daughter of Zion, unto thee shall it come, even the first dominion; the kingdom shall come to the daughter of Jerusalem.” (Micah 4:8) We know from both the Gospels as well as the Rabbinic writings that it was believed that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem, but this prophecy about his birth being announced from the tower of the flock was equally well-known to the Jews (Targum Pseudo-Jon. On Gen. 35.21). There is also an ancient story of Messiah’s birth related in the Jerusalem Talmud which says the Messiah would be born “in the royal castle of Bethlehem” (Ber. 2.3 cf. Midrash on Lamentations 1.16). According to the Rabbis, even if a castle falls down, it is still called a castle (Yalkut, Vol. 2, p. 60 B). But this Migdal Eder, the “tower of the flock,” was an old watchtower that remained from the ruins of the royal castle and it was from here that the shepherds kept watch over the Temple flocks just outside Bethlehem.
And another piece of historical information, the shepherds who tended these flocks were no ordinary shepherds. The reason we know this is that shepherds, because of their necessary isolation from the religions life of the nation, were under a Rabbinic ban, such as that imposed on others who engaged in trades that in some way rendered them unclean, such as tax collectors, weavers, tanners, physicians, midwives, city sanitation workers, etc. And yet, on the night of Christ’s birth, we see the shepherds who were keeping watch over the flock in Bethlehem going freely about the neighborhood conversing openly with the people about the things they had seen and heard. The only reason these shepherds were able to do so is that they were not under the Rabbinic ban because these were not ordinary shepherds, their duty was to guard and care for the Temple flock, a sacred purpose, and they were not required to live in isolation from the religious life but in fact played a very important role in that religious life.
All of which means that not only was Jesus born in Bethlehem, as the ancient prophet had foretold, but his birth was announced to the Jewish people by the very shepherds stationed in the Migdal Eder, the royal tower of the temple flock, who kept watch over the lambs destined for sacrifice in Jerusalem.
So the evidence for shepherds being in the fields of Bethlehem on a December night is rather extensive, whereas the evidence to the contrary is based on what? …
In Christ,
Pilgrimer
Pilgrimer
Active Member
Pardon me if I take leave to doubt the accuracy of that report. There wouldn't be any "Israeli shepherds" in Bethlehem. Bethlehem is in the West Bank and under the control of the Palestinian Authority. If you want to talk with shepherds in the Bethlehem district you'll have to talk to Palestinian Arabs.FHII said:
And with the construction of the security fence that has cut off access to outlying areas, shepherding in the area is slowly dying out.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/dec/23/bethlehem-shepherds-dying-breed
Below is an hold photograph listed in the Library of Congress Photo ID 289143 taken of Palestinian shepherds in the traditional "shepherd's field" at Bethlehem on Christmas Eve c. 1920-1933.
In Christ,
Pilgrimer
Your "historic evidence" is nothing more then denominational mysticism to anybody who is not part of that denomination. 200-300 years after Christ saint So-and -so said that it is on that date.Pilgrimer said:
Your "archaeological evidence" does not exist by your own admission.
As for shepherds... pure speculation.
True believers can use their liberty Christ won for them on the cross to celebrate his birth any time they want .Elle said:
Colossians 2:15-17
15 And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.
Freedom From Human Rules
16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.
Pilgrimer
Active Member
That's your response to someone who made an effort to treat you as a serious Bible student?Suhar said:
Similar threads
