Was Jesus born in September or on December 25? — Using John the Baptist’s birth

[CadyandZoe]

Very well, since you refuse to accept any evidence from these Jewish writings about 1st century Jewish law and practice, then you have to "toss aside" the notion that sheep would not be in the fields in December, because that theory is based on a misunderstanding of a passage from the Talmud. So what are your views now about those shepherds?

I accept evidence from the Bible, which are Jewish writings for the most part. I don't trust the Talmud for the reasons I outlined earlier.

Your pictures are nice but they don't prove anything. Maybe they were taken on Christmas day, maybe not.

I don't believe the photograph was taken by British soldiers. It might have been taken by a professional photographer, hoping to sell Christmas cards to the folks back home.

Why are you interested in this subject? Are you an apologist for the Catholic religion? Do you believe that Jesus was Mithra?

 

[Pilgrimer]

I accept evidence from the Bible, which are Jewish writings for the most part. I don't trust the Talmud for the reasons I outlined earlier.

Your pictures are nice but they don't prove anything. Maybe they were taken on Christmas day, maybe not.

I don't believe the photograph was taken by British soldiers. It might have been taken by a professional photographer, hoping to sell Christmas cards to the folks back home.

Why are you interested in this subject? Are you an apologist for the Catholic religion? Do you believe that Jesus was Mithra?

Those photos are part of a collection in the Library of Congress, so they are historical records, not simply some tourist's photos.

I am Protestant Evangelical (Southern Baptist to be specific) so no, I am far from an apologist for the Roman Catholic Church whose doctrines I believe have some serious issues. I am an apologist for the Christian faith and practices that can be traced back in writing to the time of the Apostles, including Christians observing the nativity of Christ on December 25. Here is a brief list of the earliest Christian writings that mention the Christian celebration of the birth of Jesus.

From Clement of Rome (35 – 110 A.D.)-this is the Clement mentioned by Paul in Philippians 4:3
“Let the birth day of our Savior Jesus Christ be celebrated on the twenty fifth day of the ninth month beginning to reckon from March [i.e. December 25].”

And a second reference:
“Brethren, keep diligently the feast days, and truly in the first place the day of Christ’s birth.”

Telesphorus (67-137 A.D.) wrote in an epistle:
“It is ordained, that in the holy night of the Nativity of the Lord, they do celebrate the public Church services, and in them solemnly sing the Angels hymn, because also the same night he was declared unto the shepherds by an Angel, as the truth itself doth witness.”

Hippolytus (170-235 A.D.)
“For the first advent of the lord among us in the flesh, when he was born in Bethlehem, took place on the 8th day before the Kalends of January [i.e. December 25], on the fourth day of the week [i.e. Wednesday], in the 42nd year of Augustus’ reign, in the 5500th year from Adam.”

Then a controversy broke out among Christians whether to celebrate Jesus' birth on the date when he was born, December 25, regardless what day of the week that fell on, or on the day of the week when he was born, Wednesday, regardless of the calendar date.

Theophilus (d. 195 A.D.) Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine in response to that argument wrote:
“…we ought to celebrate the birthday of our Lord, on what day soever the 25th of December shall happen.” (cited by Magdeburgenses Cent 2. C. 6 and by Hospian, de orig: Festorum Christianorum_

The decision by Theophilus, one of the most esteemed leaders of a church in the Jewish homeland put the issue to rest.

Origen, scholar to Clement of Alexandria, about the year 226 in various parts of his works records the annual and universal observation of the nativity on December 25.

After him, Cyprian Bishop of Carthage in 240 wrote: “The much desired, and long looked for, day of Christ’s Nativity, is now present with us, that famous solemnity is now upon us, and as upon this present day the holy Church, throughout the whole world gives thanks to her Savior, and renders praise to him, that as this day, visited her from on high. Joys are preached from Heaven, and merry making commanded on earth. The fore going night conscious of that sacred Birth, is by us turned to day by bright burning lamps and torches. The powers above give glory to God in the highest, peace is promised upon earth, and good will confirmed unto men. The angels are present, and speak to the shepherds, they do not now disdain to open their mouths to mean persons, and though they be the most glorious creatures, yet they despise not those who are weak.” (This gives us some insight into how the early Christians observed Christmas.)

And in his Ecclesiastical History, Nicephorus records that during the persecution of Diocletian (284-305 A.D.), “when the Feast of Christ’s Birthday came, and a multitude of Christians in all ages had assembled together in the Temple to celebrate that Birthday, Diocletian the tyrant, having gotten an advantageous occasion whereby he might accomplish his madness and fury, sent men thither to enclose the Temple, and to set it on fire round about, and so confined them all to the ashes, even twenty thousand persons.”

All of these records were long before the 4th century, when the popular theory has it that the Roman Catholic Church adopted a pagan holiday to celebrate Jesus' birth. That is simply not true, no matter how popular it is or how many websites and social media posts make the claim.

As for the cult of the Roman god Mithras, it was one of the closed or secret societies among the Roman armies and what little historians actually know about Mithras is from archaeological artifacts such as the tauroctony below which depicts the main theme of Roman Mithraism, Mithra slaying the bull after which a feast was held. Most of the earliest writings that give us information about this Roman cult are from Christians who were critical of the cult.

So no, there is no connection whatsoever between the Roman Mithras and Jesus, including the date of his birth. That claim can be traced back historically to two French academics in the 18th century – Charles Francois Dupuis (l. 1742-1809 CE) and Constantin Francois Chasseboef de Volney (l. 1757-1820 CE who first made the claim that Christianity was a copy of Mithraism and that Christ had never existed, that the virgin birth, the visit of the magi, the 12 disciples, the last supper, and the crucifixion were all copied from Mithraism. Of course, it has only been in the past 100 years that the new science of archaeology has developed and those claims have been proven to be false, but those old wives tales are as popular as ever.


The only known facts about the Roman Mithras is that he rose up from a rock fully grown (he wasn't "born" and certainly not from a virgin), and his only exploit was the slaying of the bull, a triumph which was celebrated by Mithras and Sol (the Roman sun-god) and Luna (the Roman moon-goddess) at an annual feast on June 26. This record of the annual celebration date is inscribed on the Virunum albm that was discovered in 1992 and is also shown to be the actual practice in the 650 Mithraeum (caves where the cult held their worship) that have been discovered in which the primary remains are dishes, utensils, and an abundance of cherry pits, which supports the Virunum inscription as cherries are ripe in June. It is interesting to note as well, that in all these Mithraeum that were destroyed in the early 4th century by the Christians, coins were discovered scattered around, the Christians considering the coins to be defiled and left them to the ruins.

The truth is, there are no actual records of any similarities between Mithras and Christ. It has all been fabricated to try to discredit Christianity but has since been proven to be false by archaeological evidence.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

[CadyandZoe]

Those photos are part of a collection in the Library of Congress, so they are historical records, not simply some tourist's photos.

Where they are stored matters little.

I am Protestant Evangelical (Southern Baptist to be specific) so no, I am far from an apologist for the Roman Catholic Church whose doctrines I believe have some serious issues. I am an apologist for the Christian faith and practices that can be traced back in writing to the time of the Apostles, including Christians observing the nativity of Christ on December 25. Here is a brief list of the earliest Christian writings that mention the Christian celebration of the birth of Jesus.

From Clement of Rome (35 – 110 A.D.)-this is the Clement mentioned by Paul in Philippians 4:3
“Let the birth day of our Savior Jesus Christ be celebrated on the twenty fifth day of the ninth month beginning to reckon from March [i.e. December 25].”

And a second reference:
“Brethren, keep diligently the feast days, and truly in the first place the day of Christ’s birth.”

Telesphorus (67-137 A.D.) wrote in an epistle:
“It is ordained, that in the holy night of the Nativity of the Lord, they do celebrate the public Church services, and in them solemnly sing the Angels hymn, because also the same night he was declared unto the shepherds by an Angel, as the truth itself doth witness.”

Hippolytus (170-235 A.D.)
“For the first advent of the lord among us in the flesh, when he was born in Bethlehem, took place on the 8th day before the Kalends of January [i.e. December 25], on the fourth day of the week [i.e. Wednesday], in the 42nd year of Augustus’ reign, in the 5500th year from Adam.”

Then a controversy broke out among Christians whether to celebrate Jesus' birth on the date when he was born, December 25, regardless what day of the week that fell on, or on the day of the week when he was born, Wednesday, regardless of the calendar date.

Theophilus (d. 195 A.D.) Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine in response to that argument wrote:
“…we ought to celebrate the birthday of our Lord, on what day soever the 25th of December shall happen.” (cited by Magdeburgenses Cent 2. C. 6 and by Hospian, de orig: Festorum Christianorum_

The decision by Theophilus, one of the most esteemed leaders of a church in the Jewish homeland put the issue to rest.

Origen, scholar to Clement of Alexandria, about the year 226 in various parts of his works records the annual and universal observation of the nativity on December 25.

After him, Cyprian Bishop of Carthage in 240 wrote: “The much desired, and long looked for, day of Christ’s Nativity, is now present with us, that famous solemnity is now upon us, and as upon this present day the holy Church, throughout the whole world gives thanks to her Savior, and renders praise to him, that as this day, visited her from on high. Joys are preached from Heaven, and merry making commanded on earth. The fore going night conscious of that sacred Birth, is by us turned to day by bright burning lamps and torches. The powers above give glory to God in the highest, peace is promised upon earth, and good will confirmed unto men. The angels are present, and speak to the shepherds, they do not now disdain to open their mouths to mean persons, and though they be the most glorious creatures, yet they despise not those who are weak.” (This gives us some insight into how the early Christians observed Christmas.)

And in his Ecclesiastical History, Nicephorus records that during the persecution of Diocletian (284-305 A.D.), “when the Feast of Christ’s Birthday came, and a multitude of Christians in all ages had assembled together in the Temple to celebrate that Birthday, Diocletian the tyrant, having gotten an advantageous occasion whereby he might accomplish his madness and fury, sent men thither to enclose the Temple, and to set it on fire round about, and so confined them all to the ashes, even twenty thousand persons.”

All of these records were long before the 4th century, when the popular theory has it that the Roman Catholic Church adopted a pagan holiday to celebrate Jesus' birth. That is simply not true, no matter how popular it is or how many websites and social media posts make the claim.

As for the cult of the Roman god Mithras, it was one of the closed or secret societies among the Roman armies and what little historians actually know about Mithras is from archaeological artifacts such as the tauroctony below which depicts the main theme of Roman Mithraism, Mithra slaying the bull after which a feast was held. Most of the earliest writings that give us information about this Roman cult are from Christians who were critical of the cult.

So no, there is no connection whatsoever between the Roman Mithras and Jesus, including the date of his birth. That claim can be traced back historically to two French academics in the 18th century – Charles Francois Dupuis (l. 1742-1809 CE) and Constantin Francois Chasseboef de Volney (l. 1757-1820 CE who first made the claim that Christianity was a copy of Mithraism and that Christ had never existed, that the virgin birth, the visit of the magi, the 12 disciples, the last supper, and the crucifixion were all copied from Mithraism. Of course, it has only been in the past 100 years that the new science of archaeology has developed and those claims have been proven to be false, but those old wives tales are as popular as ever.

View attachment 32652
The only known facts about the Roman Mithras is that he rose up from a rock fully grown (he wasn't "born" and certainly not from a virgin), and his only exploit was the slaying of the bull, a triumph which was celebrated by Mithras and Sol (the Roman sun-god) and Luna (the Roman moon-goddess) at an annual feast on June 26. This record of the annual celebration date is inscribed on the Virunum albm that was discovered in 1992 and is also shown to be the actual practice in the 650 Mithraeum (caves where the cult held their worship) that have been discovered in which the primary remains are dishes, utensils, and an abundance of cherry pits, which supports the Virunum inscription as cherries are ripe in June. It is interesting to note as well, that in all these Mithraeum that were destroyed in the early 4th century by the Christians, coins were discovered scattered around, the Christians considering the coins to be defiled and left them to the ruins.

The truth is, there are no actual records of any similarities between Mithras and Christ. It has all been fabricated to try to discredit Christianity but has since been proven to be false by archaeological evidence.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

I don't accept the so-called Early Church Fathers either. Sorry.

 

[WalterandDebbie]

Those photos are part of a collection in the Library of Congress, so they are historical records, not simply some tourist's photos.

I am Protestant Evangelical (Southern Baptist to be specific) so no, I am far from an apologist for the Roman Catholic Church whose doctrines I believe have some serious issues. I am an apologist for the Christian faith and practices that can be traced back in writing to the time of the Apostles, including Christians observing the nativity of Christ on December 25. Here is a brief list of the earliest Christian writings that mention the Christian celebration of the birth of Jesus.

From Clement of Rome (35 – 110 A.D.)-this is the Clement mentioned by Paul in Philippians 4:3
“Let the birth day of our Savior Jesus Christ be celebrated on the twenty fifth day of the ninth month beginning to reckon from March [i.e. December 25].”

And a second reference:
“Brethren, keep diligently the feast days, and truly in the first place the day of Christ’s birth.”

Telesphorus (67-137 A.D.) wrote in an epistle:
“It is ordained, that in the holy night of the Nativity of the Lord, they do celebrate the public Church services, and in them solemnly sing the Angels hymn, because also the same night he was declared unto the shepherds by an Angel, as the truth itself doth witness.”

Hippolytus (170-235 A.D.)
“For the first advent of the lord among us in the flesh, when he was born in Bethlehem, took place on the 8th day before the Kalends of January [i.e. December 25], on the fourth day of the week [i.e. Wednesday], in the 42nd year of Augustus’ reign, in the 5500th year from Adam.”

Then a controversy broke out among Christians whether to celebrate Jesus' birth on the date when he was born, December 25, regardless what day of the week that fell on, or on the day of the week when he was born, Wednesday, regardless of the calendar date.

Theophilus (d. 195 A.D.) Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine in response to that argument wrote:
“…we ought to celebrate the birthday of our Lord, on what day soever the 25th of December shall happen.” (cited by Magdeburgenses Cent 2. C. 6 and by Hospian, de orig: Festorum Christianorum_

The decision by Theophilus, one of the most esteemed leaders of a church in the Jewish homeland put the issue to rest.

Origen, scholar to Clement of Alexandria, about the year 226 in various parts of his works records the annual and universal observation of the nativity on December 25.

After him, Cyprian Bishop of Carthage in 240 wrote: “The much desired, and long looked for, day of Christ’s Nativity, is now present with us, that famous solemnity is now upon us, and as upon this present day the holy Church, throughout the whole world gives thanks to her Savior, and renders praise to him, that as this day, visited her from on high. Joys are preached from Heaven, and merry making commanded on earth. The fore going night conscious of that sacred Birth, is by us turned to day by bright burning lamps and torches. The powers above give glory to God in the highest, peace is promised upon earth, and good will confirmed unto men. The angels are present, and speak to the shepherds, they do not now disdain to open their mouths to mean persons, and though they be the most glorious creatures, yet they despise not those who are weak.” (This gives us some insight into how the early Christians observed Christmas.)

And in his Ecclesiastical History, Nicephorus records that during the persecution of Diocletian (284-305 A.D.), “when the Feast of Christ’s Birthday came, and a multitude of Christians in all ages had assembled together in the Temple to celebrate that Birthday, Diocletian the tyrant, having gotten an advantageous occasion whereby he might accomplish his madness and fury, sent men thither to enclose the Temple, and to set it on fire round about, and so confined them all to the ashes, even twenty thousand persons.”

All of these records were long before the 4th century, when the popular theory has it that the Roman Catholic Church adopted a pagan holiday to celebrate Jesus' birth. That is simply not true, no matter how popular it is or how many websites and social media posts make the claim.

As for the cult of the Roman god Mithras, it was one of the closed or secret societies among the Roman armies and what little historians actually know about Mithras is from archaeological artifacts such as the tauroctony below which depicts the main theme of Roman Mithraism, Mithra slaying the bull after which a feast was held. Most of the earliest writings that give us information about this Roman cult are from Christians who were critical of the cult.

So no, there is no connection whatsoever between the Roman Mithras and Jesus, including the date of his birth. That claim can be traced back historically to two French academics in the 18th century – Charles Francois Dupuis (l. 1742-1809 CE) and Constantin Francois Chasseboef de Volney (l. 1757-1820 CE who first made the claim that Christianity was a copy of Mithraism and that Christ had never existed, that the virgin birth, the visit of the magi, the 12 disciples, the last supper, and the crucifixion were all copied from Mithraism. Of course, it has only been in the past 100 years that the new science of archaeology has developed and those claims have been proven to be false, but those old wives tales are as popular as ever.

View attachment 32652
The only known facts about the Roman Mithras is that he rose up from a rock fully grown (he wasn't "born" and certainly not from a virgin), and his only exploit was the slaying of the bull, a triumph which was celebrated by Mithras and Sol (the Roman sun-god) and Luna (the Roman moon-goddess) at an annual feast on June 26. This record of the annual celebration date is inscribed on the Virunum albm that was discovered in 1992 and is also shown to be the actual practice in the 650 Mithraeum (caves where the cult held their worship) that have been discovered in which the primary remains are dishes, utensils, and an abundance of cherry pits, which supports the Virunum inscription as cherries are ripe in June. It is interesting to note as well, that in all these Mithraeum that were destroyed in the early 4th century by the Christians, coins were discovered scattered around, the Christians considering the coins to be defiled and left them to the ruins.

The truth is, there are no actual records of any similarities between Mithras and Christ. It has all been fabricated to try to discredit Christianity but has since been proven to be false by archaeological evidence.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

Hello Pilgrimer, How are you? I sent you a PM on Sunday 5-14-23, did you get it?

Love, Walter

 

[Pilgrimer]

Where they are stored matters little.

I don't accept the so-called Early Church Fathers either. Sorry.

But here’s the problem with your position: You weren’t there. You didn’t live in Israel during the time of Jesus. You were not an eyewitness to how the Jews actually practiced the Law. You were not in control of the Temple and its services. You didn’t set up the priestly rotation based on when you think they SHOULD serve. It was the Jewish people who controlled the Temple and set up the priestly services. And your opinion does not change that. All this argument burning up the internet about when Zacharias SHOULD have been serving based on someone’s opinions and calculations does not change history. Zacharias was serving with his course based on how the Jewish priests set up the weekly services. Now like it or not, right or wrong, that’s how it worked, that’s history, that's when Zacharias WOULD HAVE BEEN serving, and your opinion about how things SHOULD have been done does not change how they actually WERE done.

Same with the date of Jesus’ birth. You cannot claim that 1st and 2nd Century Christians were not celebrating his birth on December 25. You weren’t there. But Christians who were there, they wrote letters back and forth between the various churches, and they recorded that Christians WERE celebrating Jesus’ birth, ON December 25. Again, your opinion about whether they were right or wrong doesn’t change history.

When it comes to the history of the life of Jesus ... history matters.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

[CadyandZoe]

But here’s the problem with your position: You weren’t there. You didn’t live in Israel during the time of Jesus. You were not an eyewitness to how the Jews actually practiced the Law. You were not in control of the Temple and its services. You didn’t set up the priestly rotation based on when you think they SHOULD serve. It was the Jewish people who controlled the Temple and set up the priestly services. And your opinion does not change that. All this argument burning up the internet about when Zacharias SHOULD have been serving based on someone’s opinions and calculations does not change history. Zacharias was serving with his course based on how the Jewish priests set up the weekly services. Now like it or not, right or wrong, that’s how it worked, that’s history, that's when Zacharias WOULD HAVE BEEN serving, and your opinion about how things SHOULD have been done does not change how they actually WERE done.

Same with the date of Jesus’ birth. You cannot claim that 1st and 2nd Century Christians were not celebrating his birth on December 25. You weren’t there. But Christians who were there, they wrote letters back and forth between the various churches, and they recorded that Christians WERE celebrating Jesus’ birth, ON December 25. Again, your opinion about whether they were right or wrong doesn’t change history.

When it comes to the history of the life of Jesus ... history matters.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

Only true and correct history matters.

 

[Pilgrimer]

Only true and correct history matters.

The only "history" we have of the 1st Century Roman Jewish world are the New Testament and the Christian and Jewish writings that you have dismissed. So where are you getting your "true and correct history" if not from these sources?
In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

[CadyandZoe]

The only "history" we have of the 1st Century Roman Jewish world are the New Testament and the Christian and Jewish writings that you have dismissed. So where are you getting your "true and correct history" if not from these sources?
In Christ,
Pilgrimer

Good question. I must admit. When I did my video I never suspected that the information presented to me might be erroneous. Nonetheless, I already know that the ECF's and the Talmud are unreliable. If you based your conclusions on these sources, I would dismiss your work out of hand.

Also, the fact that you concluded December 25 is highly suspect on the surface of it, given that it corresponds with the winter solstice, typical of pagan religions and the syncretism of pagan religion and Christianity.

 

[Pilgrimer]

Good question. I must admit. When I did my video I never suspected that the information presented to me might be erroneous. Nonetheless, I already know that the ECF's and the Talmud are unreliable. If you based your conclusions on these sources, I would dismiss your work out of hand.

Also, the fact that you concluded December 25 is highly suspect on the surface of it, given that it corresponds with the winter solstice, typical of pagan religions and the syncretism of pagan religion and Christianity.

Most students, and especially those who are advocating against the historical date that Christians have celebrated Jesus' birth, don't actually verify the original sources of these arguments, and just accept those arguments out of hand. Even the sources you linked below your video actually use the Jewish writings you object to in order to make some of their arguments! Let me give you an example.

There is only one source in all the world that records that all 24 courses were on duty during the three pilgrimage festivals. And that source is the Mishnah Sukkah. Very few of the websites and articles and books about this subject will even mention the Mishnah as the source for that information, but even those who do won't actually cite the passage, let alone quote it. We can only surmise that the reason is that, best case scenario they themselves are ignorant of the passage and never actually looked it up, or worse case scenario, they are intentionally taking that out of context to support their theory. Let me quote the actual passage, whether you agree with it or not, so at least you will know where the idea came from that all 24 courses were on duty during the pilgrimage festivals:

"At three times during the year, all twenty-four priestly watches have equal status, in that all receive a share in the Temple service independent of the standard order of the watches ... The principle is that the priestly watch whose time is fixed during the Festival, sacrifices the daily offering during the Festival, as well as vow-offerings, free-will offerings, and all other communal offerings. And that watch sacrifices all of them even during the Festival, when other aspects of the service are shared by all the watches." (Mishnah Sukkah 5:7)

Did you get that? What this passage actually says is that the regular rotation of the courses were not "suspended" during the festivals, as the anti-Christmas crowd is claiming, but the regular rotation continued and the course whose duty happened to fall that week handled all the daily and voluntary sacrifices while all 24 courses handled the festival sacrifices. Completely different from what the anti-Christmas crowd is claiming! I understand they need to add three weeks to the 48 weeks to get their calculations to line up with the calendar, but the truth is the priestly courses served Sabbath to Sabbath, Sabbath to Sabbath, without regard to the dates on the calendar and continuing right on through the festivals.
And here's the bottom line: IF the popular theory is correct, that the courses began again every year with the first week of Nisan served by the first course, the second week the second course, etc. and the rotation pausing during the festivals of Passover and Pentecost, then the course that SHOULD HAVE BEEN on duty when the Temple was set on fire on the 9/10th of Ab (the 19th week of the year) SHOULD HAVE BEEN the 17th course. But it wasn't the 17th course that was on duty when the Temple was destroyed on August 5, 70 A.D., it was the 1st course of Jehoiarib!

So again, all the speculation and calculation in the world does not change history. When Zacharias was serving was based on how the Jews at the time calculated the services, and they did not start the courses over every year, nor did they pause them during the festivals. The priests served Sabbath to Sabbath, Sabbath to Sabbath beginning with the reinstitution of the priesthood under the Maccabees and continued in unbroken Sabbath to Sabbath succession until the Temple was destroyed. And they continued to keep track of which course was due to serve Sabbath to Sabbath for generations, reciting in the Synagogues every Sabbath which course was due to serve that week, praying for the restoration of the priestly services. Surviving representatives of the 24 courses who fled Judea after the Bar Kochbah Revolt, settled in 24 provinces of Galilee and their locations in order were inscribed on the "Caesarea Inscription of the Twenty-Four Priestly Courses" discovered in 1962 by the Israeli archaeologist and historian Dr. Michael Avi-Yonah, Professor of Archaeology at the Hebrew University at Jerusalem and Secretary of Israel's Department of Antiquity. The point being, if the way the Jews had arranged the weekly courses began again every year with the first week of Nisan, they wouldn't have needed to keep track of the succession. Even today, their charts continue the unbroken Sabbath to Sabbath succession and into the future.

If you want to start with a KNOWN DATE that a particular course WAS ACTUALLY SERVING and calculate from there backwards using the 168-day cycles the Jews used and calculate the dates Zacharias' course would have been on duty in the years preceding the birth of Jesus, those dates are below. Does it prove that Jesus was born December 25? No. There is no "proof" of many of the dates of New Testament events, including those regarding the life of Jesus. But what it does "prove" is that the December 25 date is possible and when ALL the historical evidence is considered, the weight of evidence supports the date that has been celebrated by all of Christendom since the time of the Apostles, including the churches in the Jewish homeland. The church at Rome didn't "pick" that date, it originated with the churches in Israel, and at first the church at Rome considered it an "oriental invention."

Now I hear a lot of arguments all the time about how the Jews didn't correctly practice the Law based on somebody's own interpretation of the Law, and that may or may not be true, that's a theological issue. But history cannot tell us whether THE WAY the Jews did things was right or wrong, it can only tell us HOW they did things. Jesus never criticized the Sadducees and Pharisees for how they practiced the Law. He criticized them for being so meticulous in keeping the least little jot and tittle of the Law, even weighing to the tiniest measure how much mint and cumin to tithe, but forgetting the weightier matters of the Law, like love and mercy and justice.

Service of the Division of Abijah
8-5 BCE

​

B.C. Division of Abijah Served	Conception of John	Conception of Jesus	Birth of Jesus
5, Sept. 3-10	Sep. 10	Feb. 25	Nov. 25, 4 B.C.
5, March 19-26	Mar. 26	Sep. 11	June 11, 4 B.C.
6, Oct. 3-10*	Oct. 10	Mar. 25	Dec. 25, 5 B.C.
6, April 18-25	Apr. 25	Oct. 10	July 10, 5 B.C.
7, Nov. 1-8	Nov. 8	Apr. 23	Jan. 23, 5 B.C.
7, May 17-24	May 24	Nov. 8	Aug. 8, 6 B.C.
7, Jan. 18-25	Jan. 25	July 10	Apr. 10, 6 B.C
8, Aug. 3-10	Aug. 10	Jan. 25	Oct. 25, 7 B.C.

*October 2-9 with day beginning at previous sunset

 

[Pilgrimer]

Good question. I must admit. When I did my video I never suspected that the information presented to me might be erroneous. Nonetheless, I already know that the ECF's and the Talmud are unreliable. If you based your conclusions on these sources, I would dismiss your work out of hand.

Also, the fact that you concluded December 25 is highly suspect on the surface of it, given that it corresponds with the winter solstice, typical of pagan religions and the syncretism of pagan religion and Christianity.

P.S. The winter solstice occurs on December 22, not December 25.

There is no "syncretism" of paganism and Christianity. And I would challenge you to provide actual historical evidence that suggests there has been. And by "actual historical evidence," I don't mean some website article or book or movie that CLAIMS Christians adopted paganism but doesn't provide any EVIDENCE.


In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

[Pilgrimer]

A birth on sukkoth would make sense to me since it was in a manger which is shown as a 3 walled booth.

Christmas seems more in line with his death and rebirth and with the overcoming experience aka 3 days in heart of the earth which is being “born again.”

It's not Scripturally or historically feasible that Jesus was born during Tabernacles.
First, Herod would never have scheduled a census during a festival. The Law required the Jewish people to return to their ancestral seats to be counted in any census. This would have prevented the Jews from being able to make the pilgrimage to Jerusalem to celebrate Tabernacles as the Law commanded. There would have been a riot, just like the riot a few years later when Rome conducted a census according to Roman method and violated Jewish census law. There was rioting and thousands of Jews were killed, which gave rise to the Zealots who later led the revolt against Rome and involved the whole nation in the war which destroyed the nation and brought the Old Covenant to an end. So to assume that the Jews would have passively broken the Law and skipped Tabernacles for a census without a breath being said about it by anybody, including the Gospels of Matthew of Luke, that is not tenable.

And second, Joseph was an observant Jew. He would not have remained in Bethlehem for a census, only 5 miles from Jerusalem, a short hour and a half walk, and violated the commandment to spend Tabernacles in Jerusalem. Not when he was that close to the city. Not to mention all the other Jews who also were in Bethlehem for the census.

I don't think it's a good idea to base history on interpretations of what a particular Mosaic festival may or may not have symbolized. Jesus shed his blood to make atonement for sin on the 15th Nisan and thereby fulfilled what the Day of Atonement blood offering on the 10th Tishri symbolized without having to die on that day. In fact, Jesus' death fulfilled every sacrifice, morning and evening, day in and day out throughout the year, and every Sabbath sacrifice and offering, and every Festival sacrifice and offering, and every firstfruit sacrifice and offering, and every voluntary sacrifice and offering through the generations, all fulfilled not on the dates they occurred, else Jesus would have had to die again and again and again. But that one sacrifice, on that one day, fulfilled them all.

So I think it can be misleading to try to tie the historical events of Jesus' life which fulfilled all these things to the many, many dates on the calendar when those things were observed.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

[Pilgrimer]

Whenever the real birth date was celebrating, remembering on Dec 25th is okay with me.

All of Christendom since the time of the Apostles have celebrated his birth on December 25, so you're in good company.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

[Pilgrimer]

I have a little plaque in my garden with that verse on it.

Not to get too deep into the legalities of the Old Covenant, but after the priest who offered the incense had completed his ministry and left the Sanctuary, which ended the day's services, he paused at the top of the steps and said those verses as a blessing upon the people. This is the prayer Zacharias was unable to pronounce after he was struck dumb while performing the incensing. So this blessing has a special place in the hearts of us Christians.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

[Pilgrimer]

Hi W & D~

Jesus Birth “clues”, are scriptural, but not plain.

in brief...
* Knowing historically “shepherds” stayed out all Night in the fields, with their “sheep” flocks during “birthing” season...ie Spring/ (historical citation?) according to Hebrew lunar calendar, Nisan, Georgian Calendar...April/March....
(Shepherds in the fields were first told of Jesus’ Birth...(The Lamb OF God).
Luke 2:...background.
Luke 2: 7 & 8....Jesus’ birth was at night, and Shepards were told (by Angels) at night of Jesus’ birth.

* Pryor to Ex 40, God is telling Moses, what and how to Build a structure unto God.
Ex 40: 1 & 2, Moses is told to gather the congregation to the Tabernacle.
A “Tabernacle” is notice of Gods Presence “WITH” men gathered together to Praise God.
(First Day of the First Month...again, Nisan.)
. (Later, all such Structures call “Gods House of Prayer”.)
Isa 56:7
Matt 21:13

* Exodus....mans sacrificing of Lambs, (BLOOD and BODY) (unblemished and One Year Old)...At Passover. (Other specific animals also accepted).
God knows a mans circumstances AND EFFORT.
Ex 12:3
(Full animal offered for For the mans forgiveness, called a Sin Offering. Lev. 4
“BLOOD, FLESH, DUNG of animal “not burned or eaten.

* Jesus (Gods presence) sent and dwelt among men.
John 1:14

* Prelude... The “unexpected” is revealed with “authority” higher than “earthly kings”....
Dan 2:46 - 49

* Maji...(early star gazers recognizing Scriptural prophecy revealed in the Stars). (not modern day astrology).
* His “Star” prophecy.
Num 24:17

( Was literally a lining up of plants in such a fashion to light the sky as a huge bright star, and has not by any notable record been recorded again.)
* Maji....traveled from the East and presented Gifts to Jesus, Befitting gifts reserved to be given TO a King.)
Isa 60:6
(I think once they saw the “Star” and began their travels, it was approx. a 2 Year journey) (The distance from Sippar, the center of Magian Zoroastrianism, was a 4 - 6 week journey across the southern trade route to Jerusalem- here's a map of 1st century trade routes)



* Other texts that have to do with Rabbi’s...and Jesus’ birth during particular appointed “godly men”...(Preacher/Rabbi)
* Jesus being buried in an unused Cave/Tomb, having been “prepared” for a High Priest...(Joseph Of Arimathaea, a Jewish Sanhedrin, offered his personal burial Cave for Jesus’ burial.) (Joseph being the same Joseph who solicited and received permission to Collect Jesus’ body and bury it.)
In Brief...Hebrew Tradition and Custom...bury dead body’s before sundown...(It was actually commanded in the Law-Deuteronomy 21:22-23)
Wash the body, shroud the body, strips of fabric wound around the body to secure the shroud (the strips were to hold the myrrh and other spices that were dessicants used to hasten drying out the soft tissue---the following year the "bones" were collected and placed in a small ossuary or bonebox and placed in a small niche cut into the rock), pounds of flowers and spices tucked in about the strips of fabric, and a napkin (small piece of fabric to cover the face) The face would be washed, anointed with oil and covered with the napkin.
Custom “etiquette” historically...A “napkin” when “dining”. If a person “dining” must leave the table temporarily, and INTENDS to RETURN .... (that his plate, food, should NOT be gathered up off the table)....that person LEAVES his “napkin FOLDED” and setting beside his plate.

* The face cloth Napkin Jesus was buried with was NOT within his burial shroud, but set to the side.
John 20:7
(Indicating His intent to RETURN....rise up to Life in his Body.....)?

* Jesus’ burial was rushed....Evening was approaching...It was a Preparation Day FOR the Holy Day....Holy Day was approaching whereby no work was to be done....Putting spices/flowers, had to be gathered, taken to the tomb...and was not accomplished at the time Jesus was placed in the tomb.
* After the Holy Day passed, women brought spices and set off to put spices about the shroud on Jesus’ Body....but when they arrived at the tomb...
Jesus’ body had risen, his burial shroud lay where His Body was laid, and the Napkin folded/tied setting aside.

* Some claim, and I agree, Gentile men calling themselves “catholics”, have had great (ancient and historical) interest in searching and gathering any and all TEXTS, from ancient and historical days, OF scribes, recorders, scrolls, etc. that pertains to ancient history, particularly regarding God, Jesus, Religious aspects....AND have a very extensive Library (hall of records), that few “of the population at large have had ACCESS to view, read, study).
* Some claim, A Catholic man, reviewed information in texts speaking of Jesus’ Birth being the First day, in the Hebrew month of Nisan.
Apparently this Catholic man, believe that possible, as well it possible Jesus was born in December, according to the Julian...and Following Georgian calendar month....
So goes the suspicion is...this same man, Had text according to the Hebrew Lunar Calendar, but added a notation of his suspicion of possibly December.
Who or Why December was “established” the Catholic Churches’ official position....IDK...never attended “their” exclusive “Councils”.(The Christian writings from the first few centuries after Christ are widely available and they attest to the December 25 date.)

* Supposedly WHEN the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, and examined at length, A Jewish Calendar appears within the Text, in their historical native language....and verifies, the Jewish month of Nisan as the time of Jesus’ Birth.(I served for the Israel Antiquities Authority at the American Exhibit of the Dead Sea Scrolls in my home city of Mobile Alabama in 2005 and I have studied the scrolls. I do not recall seeing any mention of Jesus at all, let alone his date of birth. Could you please provide the citation for which scroll that information comes from? For a more reliable reference: The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament - Biblical Archaeology Society )
* The Scrolls first discovered by a Shepherd in 1947...and discovery of more up to 1956....at various times...were offered for sale, were also under authority of Jordan’s gov’.,...and without doubt of great interest to all high ranking religious leaders to see, inspect, study....and became under Israel’s authority, in 1967 (Palestinian/Israel 6 day war).
* Israel maintains the Scrolls, which are:
** Old, fragile, fragments.
** Painstakingly studied.
** being translated into other languages and posted online.
** Maintained in an Israeli Museum.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Pilgrimer]

@WalterandDebbie

Hello. Want to make a correction to an earlier post, where I said to the effect, the Magi brought gifts appropriate/befitting for a KING....the 3 kinds of gifts they brought were appropriate for;
A King...ie Gold
A Prophet...ie Myrrh (Most Christian scholars understand this gift, which the primary ingredient used at burial as a dessicant, to symbolize that Jesus was born a Sacrifice)
A High Priest ...ie Frankincense

TY

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[CadyandZoe]

Most students, and especially those who are advocating against the historical date that Christians have celebrated Jesus' birth, don't actually verify the original sources of these arguments, and just accept those arguments out of hand. Even the sources you linked below your video actually use the Jewish writings you object to in order to make some of their arguments! Let me give you an example.

There is only one source in all the world that records that all 24 courses were on duty during the three pilgrimage festivals. And that source is the Mishnah Sukkah. Very few of the websites and articles and books about this subject will even mention the Mishnah as the source for that information, but even those who do won't actually cite the passage, let alone quote it. We can only surmise that the reason is that, best case scenario they themselves are ignorant of the passage and never actually looked it up, or worse case scenario, they are intentionally taking that out of context to support their theory. Let me quote the actual passage, whether you agree with it or not, so at least you will know where the idea came from that all 24 courses were on duty during the pilgrimage festivals:

"At three times during the year, all twenty-four priestly watches have equal status, in that all receive a share in the Temple service independent of the standard order of the watches ... The principle is that the priestly watch whose time is fixed during the Festival, sacrifices the daily offering during the Festival, as well as vow-offerings, free-will offerings, and all other communal offerings. And that watch sacrifices all of them even during the Festival, when other aspects of the service are shared by all the watches." (Mishnah Sukkah 5:7)

Did you get that? What this passage actually says is that the regular rotation of the courses were not "suspended" during the festivals, as the anti-Christmas crowd is claiming, but the regular rotation continued and the course whose duty happened to fall that week handled all the daily and voluntary sacrifices while all 24 courses handled the festival sacrifices. Completely different from what the anti-Christmas crowd is claiming! I understand they need to add three weeks to the 48 weeks to get their calculations to line up with the calendar, but the truth is the priestly courses served Sabbath to Sabbath, Sabbath to Sabbath, without regard to the dates on the calendar and continuing right on through the festivals.
And here's the bottom line: IF the popular theory is correct, that the courses began again every year with the first week of Nisan served by the first course, the second week the second course, etc. and the rotation pausing during the festivals of Passover and Pentecost, then the course that SHOULD HAVE BEEN on duty when the Temple was set on fire on the 9/10th of Ab (the 19th week of the year) SHOULD HAVE BEEN the 17th course. But it wasn't the 17th course that was on duty when the Temple was destroyed on August 5, 70 A.D., it was the 1st course of Jehoiarib!

So again, all the speculation and calculation in the world does not change history. When Zacharias was serving was based on how the Jews at the time calculated the services, and they did not start the courses over every year, nor did they pause them during the festivals. The priests served Sabbath to Sabbath, Sabbath to Sabbath beginning with the reinstitution of the priesthood under the Maccabees and continued in unbroken Sabbath to Sabbath succession until the Temple was destroyed. And they continued to keep track of which course was due to serve Sabbath to Sabbath for generations, reciting in the Synagogues every Sabbath which course was due to serve that week, praying for the restoration of the priestly services. Surviving representatives of the 24 courses who fled Judea after the Bar Kochbah Revolt, settled in 24 provinces of Galilee and their locations in order were inscribed on the "Caesarea Inscription of the Twenty-Four Priestly Courses" discovered in 1962 by the Israeli archaeologist and historian Dr. Michael Avi-Yonah, Professor of Archaeology at the Hebrew University at Jerusalem and Secretary of Israel's Department of Antiquity. The point being, if the way the Jews had arranged the weekly courses began again every year with the first week of Nisan, they wouldn't have needed to keep track of the succession. Even today, their charts continue the unbroken Sabbath to Sabbath succession and into the future.

If you want to start with a KNOWN DATE that a particular course WAS ACTUALLY SERVING and calculate from there backwards using the 168-day cycles the Jews used and calculate the dates Zacharias' course would have been on duty in the years preceding the birth of Jesus, those dates are below. Does it prove that Jesus was born December 25? No. There is no "proof" of many of the dates of New Testament events, including those regarding the life of Jesus. But what it does "prove" is that the December 25 date is possible and when ALL the historical evidence is considered, the weight of evidence supports the date that has been celebrated by all of Christendom since the time of the Apostles, including the churches in the Jewish homeland. The church at Rome didn't "pick" that date, it originated with the churches in Israel, and at first the church at Rome considered it an "oriental invention."

Now I hear a lot of arguments all the time about how the Jews didn't correctly practice the Law based on somebody's own interpretation of the Law, and that may or may not be true, that's a theological issue. But history cannot tell us whether THE WAY the Jews did things was right or wrong, it can only tell us HOW they did things. Jesus never criticized the Sadducees and Pharisees for how they practiced the Law. He criticized them for being so meticulous in keeping the least little jot and tittle of the Law, even weighing to the tiniest measure how much mint and cumin to tithe, but forgetting the weightier matters of the Law, like love and mercy and justice.

Service of the Division of Abijah
8-5 BCE

​

B.C. Division of Abijah Served	Conception of John	Conception of Jesus	Birth of Jesus
5, Sept. 3-10	Sep. 10	Feb. 25	Nov. 25, 4 B.C.
5, March 19-26	Mar. 26	Sep. 11	June 11, 4 B.C.
6, Oct. 3-10*	Oct. 10	Mar. 25	Dec. 25, 5 B.C.
6, April 18-25	Apr. 25	Oct. 10	July 10, 5 B.C.
7, Nov. 1-8	Nov. 8	Apr. 23	Jan. 23, 5 B.C.
7, May 17-24	May 24	Nov. 8	Aug. 8, 6 B.C.
7, Jan. 18-25	Jan. 25	July 10	Apr. 10, 6 B.C
8, Aug. 3-10	Aug. 10	Jan. 25	Oct. 25, 7 B.C.

*October 2-9 with day beginning at previous sunset

The information you are providing here is based on 2nd century witnesses, which are suspect because they are antiChristian. I can not uncritically take the word of some rabbi's who were on the loosing side of a war with the Romans and who blamed Jesus for the destruction of the temple. Are you sure it's history you are reading or propaganda?

 

[CadyandZoe]

P.S. The winter solstice occurs on December 22, not December 25.

There is no "syncretism" of paganism and Christianity. And I would challenge you to provide actual historical evidence that suggests there has been. And by "actual historical evidence," I don't mean some website article or book or movie that CLAIMS Christians adopted paganism but doesn't provide any EVIDENCE.


In Christ,
Pilgrimer

Now I know you have an agenda.

 

[Pilgrimer]

Now I know you have an agenda.

I openly stated what my agenda is from the very beginning. I am a New Testament historian and a Christian apologist. So my agenda is to defend the truth of the history of the Christian faith.

The challenge remains.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

[Pilgrimer]

The information you are providing here is based on 2nd century witnesses, which are suspect because they are antiChristian. I can not uncritically take the word of some rabbi's who were on the loosing side of a war with the Romans and who blamed Jesus for the destruction of the temple. Are you sure it's history you are reading or propaganda?

As with the study of any ancient writings, credible historians are able to distinguish between the historical events recorded in those writings, and the religious views and opinions expressed about those events. The Astronomical Diaries of the Babylonians, for example, is a primary source for the history of this Hellenized period, even though that information was recorded by Babylonian astrologers who were recording astronomical observations and "divining" their significance for and application to the historical events they recorded. Most historians are intelligent enough to distinguish between the historical events they recorded on the one hand, and the mystical interpretations the Chaldeans gave those events on the other hand.

The same holds true for the Rabbinic literature. Like the Chaldeans, they record historical events, such as when and how the Passover lambs were slain. We can disagree with "why" they think the Temple was destroyed, and we can absolutely dismiss "who" they blamed for its destruction, but that doesn't mean the legal commentary on when and how the Passover lambs were slain is therefore inadmissible. I mean you can, but if that is your standard, then every ancient record in the world would have to be tossed and there would be no history beyond what is revealed in the Bible.

The same thing with the writings of Josephus. Archaeologists study his works, particularly the "Wars," for the priceless information they contain about the locations of structures and walls and streets in New Testament Jerusalem. The fact that Josephus places the blame for the destruction of the city on the heads of the Zealots doesn't change the value of the archaeological information.

Besides, the Talmuds and the Mishnah, where most of the historical information comes from, contain generations of legal opinion and commentary on the Old Testament Law, the "oral traditions" that existed even at the time of Jesus and are mentioned by him. And further, these legal opinions and decisions can be checked against the Old Testament for their accuracy, and very often they cite the Torah to defend their views on the proper observance of the commandments.

But as I said earlier, if you are going to toss out these early Christian and Jewish writings, then you are left with the Scriptures alone, which are sufficient for everything one needs to know about doctrine and understanding in the things of God and to live a godly Christian life. But for those who wish to learn more about the world in which the Scriptures took place, the "background" of the New Testament, and especially to construct an historical chronology of the life of Christ, and particularly for those who wish to understand the early years of the Christian faith and the development of doctrine and practice, things that are not contained in the canon of Scripture, these early writings are the only sources.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

[Taken]

P.S. The winter solstice occurs on December 22, not December 25.




In Christ,
Pilgrimer

Any Calendar date is suspect, considering a lunar “calendar” regarding, “evening and day” Scripturally equals one day, which are ‘not’ equal lengths of time.
For convenience and conducting business, men have tinkered with, changed, (multiple times) Calendars, and routinely add and omit days, hours, minutes.

Just noting…