iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Jeffrey Small

GET UPDATES FROM Jeffrey Small
 

The Origins of Christmas

Posted: 12/15/11 02:27 PM ET

This Christmas season Rhode Island joined a controversy that has brewed for years in local governments across the country: how appropriate is the installation of religious decorations on public property? Governor Chafee's solution to call the spruce in the State House a "Holiday Tree" has elicited howls of outrage from citizens complaining of the secularization of this Christian holiday. In light of this debate, let's explore the origins of Christmas. How Christian are the holiday traditions celebrated by millions across the world? What are their historical origins?

First, scholars have no idea when Jesus of Nazareth was born, except that it may have been around 4 BC, the last year of the rule of Herod the Great. The New Testament gives us neither a specific date, nor even a month. The tradition of celebrating the birth of Jesus on December 25 originated in the fourth century, around the time that Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire. The Church, however, didn't officially adopt this day for another 200 years.

Because early Christians didn't have a specific date in scripture, they chose one with metaphorical significance that also coincided with two preexisting Roman celebrations. December 25th was the date of the winter solstice on the Roman calendar -- the shortest day of the year. Sunlight grows stronger and longer each day following the solstice. Picking a day that represented the transition from dark to light would have been an appropriate symbol for those who saw in Jesus the birth of a man who would lead them to salvation. The Bible abounds in symbolic language of Jesus represented as light, a metaphor found for the divine in every other major religion as well.

The choice of December 25th also worked for the early Christians because it corresponded with two Roman celebrations centered on the winter solstice. Saturnalia, an ancient Roman celebration that originated two centuries before Christ, began on December 17th and ended on the 23rd. Saturnalia was a celebration of the god Saturn and was marked by feasts, merriment, the hanging of evergreen cuttings, the lighting of candles, and gift giving. How would the people of Rhode Island have reacted if the governor had called the tree a "Saturnalian Tree"?

Many Romans in the fourth century also celebrated the birth of the sun god, Sol Invictus, on December 25th, marking the occasion with a festival. As Christianity began to spread throughout the Roman Empire, the Christian tradition of Christmas naturally absorbed elements of these popular pagan celebrations.

During the Christmas season, churches across the world recite and reenact the birth story of Jesus in their services. Atheists like Oxford biologist Richard Dawkins delight in picking apart the story of the Virgin Birth as one of many examples of a pre-modern people believing in a religious mythology that most today would find absurd if someone made similar claims.

Academic Christian scholars over the past century, however, have also expressed a similar skepticism in the stories of the miraculous birth of Jesus. Scholars from last century's Albert Schweitzer and Rudolf Bultmann to today's Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan point out that the oldest writings in the New Testament, Paul's letters and Mark's Gospel, never mention the Virgin Birth.

The birth narrative only appears in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, written some 80 years after this miraculous birth supposedly took place. Contrary to popular conception, the authors of these gospels were not two of Jesus' 12 disciples, nor had they ever met him. They were later followers of followers of Jesus, who were writing to help establish a community of believers.

The details of the birth stories vary significantly in both gospels and often do not match non-Biblical historical information. For example, the Roman census mentioned in Luke that brings Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem did not occur at the time of Jesus' birth, and there would not have been the requirement Luke mentions that Joseph return to his ancestral home. The purpose of this part of the story is to locate the birth in Bethlehem, the city of King David where the Messiah was prophesied to arise. Jesus, however, was known as Jesus of Nazareth for the simple reason he was from that small village in Galilee.

After the specific details of this miraculous birth, the gospels tell us little more about Jesus' life (other than a brief temple appearance at age twelve as described in Luke) until his baptism by John and the beginning of his ministry around the age of thirty (this mystery of the early years of Jesus' life is explored in my novel The Breath of God).

During the time Matthew and Luke were writing their birth stories, Caesar was regularly referred to as a "Son of God" and as a divine ruler. Roman mythology, derived from the Greeks, also had many stories of the gods impregnating women. For example, Heracles was born from a mortal woman but fathered by Zeus.

We also can find similar stories of miraculous births in other religious traditions. In the legend of the Buddha's birth, which took place five hundred years before Jesus, a white elephant spirit appeared to the Buddha's mother in a dream and told her that she would give birth to a unique son. The spirit then entered her womb. A crowd gathered at the baby's birth, after which a wise old man told the people that the baby would grow into their spiritual leader.

These problems with the birth story of Jesus used to bother me, but today I can freely embrace the narrative as part of my religious and cultural heritage and learn from the powerful message it sends. I am no longer handcuffed by a need to require historical accuracy from scripture, nor must I close my eyes to the reality of our scientific world, in order to embrace my faith. When I read the account of Christ's birth, I see the metaphorical importance of the creative power of God in the life of Jesus, just as God is also the creative power behind the universe itself.

What is more important to me than the mechanics of Jesus' birth is that he was an historical figure who came to be viewed as "the Christ," the Messiah. By the force of his teachings and the life he lived, Jesus caused those around him to feel the presence of God -- a presence that stayed with them after his death. Jesus walked the walk that he preached; he lived a God-centered life characterized by compassion, acceptance, healing, and prayer. His followers looked at him and were better able to understand God.

In Jesus we see a man in whom the creative divine light shined so brightly that he became a beacon, illuminating a path not to himself as an end goal but to God. The Jesus event shows us the possibility of salvation for all. We each can find God. We can connect with our divine centers, with what the ancient Hebrews called nephesh, the breath of God, that is reason for our existence, because Jesus has preceded us and has shown us the path. Through Jesus we can glimpse ultimate reality as filtered through the everyday reality of a man born on a day 2000 years ago.

 
 
 

Follow Jeffrey Small on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jeffreysmalljr

 
 
  • Comments
  • 57
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
08:18 PM on 12/17/2011
Remember, folks: Keep Saturn in Saturnalia!
04:06 PM on 12/16/2011
.....

I would imagine real Bible scholars read articles like this for a good chuckle
04:04 PM on 12/16/2011
.....

"the Roman census mentioned in Luke"

- Archeologists have already determined that the census as a regular evnt and it did require people returning to their city of origin.
03:54 PM on 12/16/2011
.....

"the oldest writings in the New Testament, Paul's letters and Mark's Gospel, never mention the Virgin Birth.

- means nothing
03:51 PM on 12/16/2011
"the authors of these gospels were not two of Jesus' 12 disciples, nor had they ever met him"
Luke indicates that he interviewed eyewitnesses to be certain he got the facts correct
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kauaiphil
From the Alamo, to Sausalito, to St. Thomas VI, to
11:42 AM on 12/16/2011
This lie of a pregnant teenager really got out of hand. In the coming world-wide, paradigm shift, or workers revolution, I just hope the religious zealots stay out of it. The capitalist ruling-classes and multinational corporations are destroying the planet and any real democracy. As a former UT, Austin activist (1969-71), there was a lot of talk of "The Revolution." Now, at 63, I might just live long enough to actually see it happen. Interesting times. Aloha, from my lifeboat of Kauai.
PATOISJAM
reason: strategize: succeed
09:44 AM on 12/16/2011
First off, I don’t understand how or why a book could be developed about the early life of Jesus when as you say, it is unknown. What truth could be in it if it is based on conjecture?

Second, you say Jesus never met Matthew who was also known as Levi. Matthew 9:9 and Luke 5:27 clearly state that Jesus caught sight of Matthew and called him to be his disciple. Luke 6: 13-16 names Matthew as an apostle. So who were the 12 that celebrated the Passover with Jesus on the night before he was arrested? Luke however did not become a believer (disciple) until sometime after 33C.E.

The book of Matthew was written by the Apostle Matthew – he was personally known to Jesus.

The book of Luke was written by the disciple Luke – he did not personally know Jesus.

In a broad stroke you seem to paint all first-century Christians as having accepted and celebrated Christmas. There is no indication in the Holy Scriptures that any Christian (the ones holding fast to “The Way”) written about therein celebrated anything. The only thing written that they did was to gather to commemorate The Lord’s Evening Meal. You should make a distinction that was apostatized Christians (those that opposed the apostles and the “older men” and tried to subvert the true faith) that celebrated Christmas.
10:34 AM on 12/16/2011
All of the canonical gospels were written with no authors name attached; no on knows who wrote them.
PATOISJAM
reason: strategize: succeed
12:07 PM on 12/16/2011
Although the signature of Matthew was not on the scroll, external evidence to the effect that Matthew originally wrote this gospel in Hebrew reaches as far back as Papias of Hierapolis of the second century C.E. Eusebius quoted Papias as stating: "Matthew collected the oracles in the Hebrew language." In the third century also Origen also made reference to Mathew's account and he is also quoted by Eusebius. The scholar Jerome also credited Matthew as the writer.

The expression “Apostolic Father” is applied to Papias who it is said may have known one of Jesus’s apostles or may have been taught by disciples who learned from the apostles.

Whatever the case may be, it personally doesn't cause me any angst accepting whatever is in the Gospel of Matthew.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ekimus
True Believer
12:41 PM on 12/16/2011
The book's author is never named. It is only church tradition that credits the book to Matthew the Apostle. However, many scholars doubt this, one reason being that the book depends very heavily on the Gospel of Mark, also authored nameless, but traditionally ascribed to St. Peter's Acts companion John Mark.
12:02 AM on 12/16/2011
Eh, Christ's birth is rather sketchy in a lot of ways. Were there really Magi or adoring shepherds? Eh, doubt able.

The idea the Gospel writers are supposed to present is the humanity of Christ (ie he was born in a cave to a carpenter and a shamed young woman) and that he came for the salvation of all (the Gentiles and rich, represented by the Magi, and the poor and the Jews, represented by the shepherds).

So what should we truly accept as a "fact"? I'd say Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, the Virgin Birth, and the humble circumstances of Christ's birth. Other than that I'd say its poetic license.
07:45 PM on 12/15/2011
if you are a Christian than you should celebrate his birth everyday of your life.
and do away with this man made holiday and quit giving all your money to big business
if you took all the money you give to business and helped your neighbor you would feel a lot better

I believe Jesus would be much Happier with helping others on his birth than giving it to big business

MAN MADE HOLIDAY they want your money
10:36 AM on 12/16/2011
So how does giving gifts to people violate the teachings of Jesus?
06:06 PM on 12/16/2011
it does not it is just a nice thought
PATOISJAM
reason: strategize: succeed
10:55 AM on 12/19/2011
Giving gifts to a person is not a violation. One of the most precious gifts God himself gave is everlasting life as Romans 6:23 clearly states.

However, a gift given within the context of Christmas would be unacceptable to the true God as is has been proven over and over again that Christmas is of pagan origin. The true God does not accept anything muddied with paganism. Isaiah 1:11-15.
PATOISJAM
reason: strategize: succeed
10:49 AM on 12/19/2011
Jesus' birth would have meant nothing without him dying faithfully. What is important to remember is that Jesus died faithful and able to redeem sinful humans.
02:58 PM on 12/19/2011
yes your right through the blood of Christ we can be redeemed of our sins.Mark 16: 16
Rom 6:3-6 Acts 2:37-38
he needs no man made gifts just our souls.

Christmas is a Man Made Holiday paganism
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
educatormary
Always encouraging inquiry and introspection
06:59 PM on 12/15/2011
As interesting as the article is, I doubt seriously if those who are true believers even care about the when or the where Jesus was born. We know He arrived, He died, He Arose and because He lives, we can face tomorrows, without woes (no "woe is me" syndrome about everything that happens). Hallelujah!

According to your faith, be it unto you.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ekimus
True Believer
08:38 AM on 12/16/2011
But isn't it reasonable, when there is so much about his birth story that has been found to be questionable, to also put the rest of his life under the same kind of scrutiny? Those that have done just that have found the same kind of problems in the stories about his ministry, crucifixion and resurrection. The whole Jesus story doesn't hold up well under investigation.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
educatormary
Always encouraging inquiry and introspection
05:03 PM on 12/16/2011
Ekimus,
You missed the point of my comment. True Believers understand it and therefore my post needs no further explanation.
By the way, none of us "knows" when and where anything happened pertaining to our births, but we know we're here. Everything else we think we know is based upon what are told. Hmmm! What we're told--oral history, chronicled history (a story related by others for their own purposes and dependent upon the power of persuasion to promote and influence), investigated? How many people actually investigate their birth under normal familial conditions?

At any rate, I choose to believe based upon my experiences with God (and no, I will not elaborate since most naysayers have already made up their minds).

According to your faith (in whatever you believe), be it unto you.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:46 PM on 12/15/2011
I would like to see Jeffrey write a similar artical about the historical origins of Muhammad.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AdamWest1313
Hardcore Agnostic
07:11 AM on 12/16/2011
Muhammad is not a Holiday.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Claude Hosch
A single bracelet does not jingle
06:27 PM on 12/15/2011
Good article. The birth of Jesus. The Bible gives us enough information about the birth of John The Baptist to know John was born in the 9th Jewish month/12 Gregorian calendar. Elizabeth being six months pregnant the sixth (Jewish)/ ninth (Gregorian) month, and delivered three months later (Lk.1:26-50).
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andres64
Religion is a sectually transmitted disease.
06:21 PM on 12/15/2011
You had me up until the last two paragraphs.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ekimus
True Believer
08:41 AM on 12/16/2011
I agree. I't like someone bravely going forward into the dark with a flashlight, and then panicing about their progress and retreating back, even though they still have the flashlight.
photo
bump00000
The Seventh Chakra, amazon
05:29 PM on 12/15/2011
After all the rambling, my interest was peeked and it finally led to the most important part of the article....plugging the book he wrote.
05:53 PM on 12/15/2011
He was jost going over history. Sorry no short talking points, just the history
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
syntax facit saltum
We do not live in a 2 story universe
08:00 PM on 12/15/2011
Okay. Forgive me, but that is a pet peeve of mine. The verb is: "piqued" not peeked :)
photo
bump00000
The Seventh Chakra, amazon
10:37 PM on 12/15/2011
Oops! Thank you. Actually we are both wrong. It should be peaked. At least in the content I intended for that sentence. My curiosity was raised.

Piqued, would be: "A state of vexation caused by a perceived slight or indignity; a feeling of wounded pride."

And while writing a sentence it is easier on the eye if you double space after a period before starting a new sentence. Check out most articles you will see what I mean.

Wished you had been there to edit my first novel. Thanks again.