Ronin Truth
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2013
- Messages
- 22,510
Was Christmas originally a pagan holiday? Nope.
- Thread starter TER
- Start date
heavenlyboy34
Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2008
- Messages
- 59,093
They aren't. If an anarchist posts in a monarchist thread, it's common for the OP to have it removed or a mod to do it capriciously. Free-flowing threads, in any meaningful way, only happen in the dungeon of RPFs.
TER
Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2008
- Messages
- 17,946
Below is an informative series of chapters which describes biblical and historical evidence which points to December 25th as the accurate date of Christ's birth. After the links is the summary of the writing.
December 25th as the Actual Date of the Birth of Christ
In recent years one hears more and more frequently the view, that because the exact date of the birth of Christ is unknown to us, the Church placed Christmas on the alleged day of the pagan celebration of the "Invincible Sun" (the "god" Sol Invictus), as a symbolic gesture, to mean that Christ is the Sun of Righteousness, and in order to replace the pagan feast by overlapping it.
To the contrary, historical studies have shown that "the separation of the feast of Christmas from the feast of Theophany, as well as the choice of December 25th as a day of celebration, were made for pragmatic ecclesiastical reasons and not for reasons of copying or competing against a pagan model." Historical sources and records regarding this issue prove that the ecclesiastical establishment of the feast of Christmas for December 25th (which was celebrated for the first time in Rome in 336 A.D.) preceded that of Sol Invictus, which was a celebration established by Emperor Julian the Apostate in around 362 A.D. for December 25th, which was to replace the older feast of the "Birth of the Invincible" (Natal Invicti), which was not the sun. This move by Julian the Apostate in establishing solar feasts, was most likely an attempt to replace the Christmas feast with his own feast of the sun, and not the other way around. To establish this fact, we refer to the interpretation of Saint John Chrysostom, who testifies that the Church of Rome knew through its archives, as the capital of the Roman Empire when Christ was born, the exact date of the census of Caesar Augustus, when Christ was born (Lk. 2:1-7). Chrysostom also goes into detail concerning the biblical events from the time the birth of John the Forerunner was announced to his father Zechariah until the birth of Christ.
In this brief study, we will describe exactly how the date for the birth of Christ was determined, with the guidance of Saint John Chrysostom, "the meadow of the words of inspired Scripture."...
Part I
Part II
Part III
Part IV
Summary of the Above Biblical Determinations
Based on the above hermeneutical calculations of St. John Chrysostom, it has been demonstrated that Zechariah, the father of John the Forerunner, according to the first chapter of the Gospel of Luke, offered incense in the Holy of Holies according to the prescribed ritual for the feast of Atonement, as a High Priest. In detail of this ritual, he entered the Holy of Holies alone, without being visible to the people, and he offered incense on the golden altar of incense, which is in between the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place (Holy of the Holies). Therefore this could not have been a daily offering of incense in the Holy Place, like all the priests would do on a daily basis, rather all the relevant facts point to the feast of Atonement, which was between September and October, for it was on this day only that the High Priest would be alone in the Sanctuary. Immediately after those days of Atonement and Tabernacles and upon the return of Zechariah to his home, Elizabeth conceived and became pregnant (cf. Lk. 1:24). Six months later, in March, the Son and Word of God was conceived by the Theotokos and the Holy Spirit (cf. Lk. 1:26). From this is determined nine months when Christ was born, a total of fifteen months since John the Forerunner was conceived, which falls in the end of December, in agreement with Church tradition.
The Testimony of the Church of Rome
In the same homily of St. John Chrysostom, "On the Day of the Birth of Our Savior Christ", he also invokes the testimony of the Church of Rome which celebrated the Nativity of Christ on December 25th, and this is why the homily bears the subtitle: "Which was then still uncertain, but a few years ago made known and proclaimed on the part of ones who came from the West."
Concerning this testimony, Chrysostom says: "It is clear that He was born during the first census. And it is possible for the one who desires to know exactly to read the original codices publicly stored at Rome and learn the time of the census. So what, someone says, is this to us - who are neither there nor present? But listen, and do not be unbelieving, because we have received the day from those who know these things accurately and who dwell in that city. For the ones living there, having observed it from the beginning and from ancient tradition, now have themselves transmitted the knowledge of it to us."35 The Saint goes on to explain how divine Providence caused the soul of Caesar Augustus to initiate the first census of the ecumene in order to fulfill the prophecies for the birth of Christ in Bethlehem, even though the Theotokos lived in Nazareth, and thus the power of God is revealed: "Did you notice, beloved, the economy of God, the way He manages His (purposes) through unbelievers as well as believers, that strangers to piety might learn His might and power."36
The Orthodox Acceptance of Hostile Interpretations
Despite the above evidence, typical is the opinion of the preeminent contemporary Greek liturgist John Fountoulis, who writes: "With the epiphany of false gods and emperors, the Christian Church opposed this with the epiphany of the true God and King Christ, the true theophany. Also the worship of the sun, which conquers during the winter solstice the darkness of night, was opposed with the worship of the true sun, Christ, who rose, as the prophet Isaiah said, in a world sitting in darkness and shadows." He speaks of how the feasts of Christmas and Theophany originated to replace feasts of the sun and the celebration of the winter solstice. It was by Christians replacing these winter pagan feasts, that the date for the Presentation of Christ forty days after His Nativity and the date for the Annunciation nine months before the Nativity, and even the conception of St. John the Forerunner in September originated. Thus, everything in our immoveable calendar for Professor Fountoulis begins with "Sol Invictis" during the winter solstice of December 21-22.
To the contrary, such misconceptions ignore historical facts and the biblical and patristic tradition to explain the origins of our liturgical feasts. That such a revered professor and liturgist would hold such opinions reveals that even Orthodox are under an academic/theological captivity that directly opposes Orthodox tradition, whether we are ignorant of the facts or not.
Epilogue: The Role of Divine Providence
To conclude, the feast of Christmas was not determined by Christian leaders to replace the worship of the invincible sun, but as St. John Chrysostom writes, it was according to the divine economy, divine Providence, that the God-man was born during the census of Caesar Augustus, as we previously mentioned, and that the Conception of the Forerunner that opens the Gospel of Luke, which led to creation being refashioned through the Incarnation, should fall in September, when the world is said to have been created and the new year began according to Hebrew calculations. For the symbolic significance of the census taking placing during the days of the Incarnation, and that it was not a coincidence, the sacred hymnographer writes: "When it was time for Your coming to earth, the first imperial taxation was held, but You also took a census, O Lord, recording the names of all men who believed in Your birth. You used the decree of Caesar for Your own end: to make manifest Your timeless and eternal Kingdom. Therefore we pay You our taxes, not with golden coins, but with the riches of Orthodox theology, O God and Savior of our souls."38 It was thus according to the economy of the Holy Trinity, and not a "coincidence" that these sacred events took place, nor are they merely a replacement of pagan feasts.
December 25th as the Actual Date of the Birth of Christ
In recent years one hears more and more frequently the view, that because the exact date of the birth of Christ is unknown to us, the Church placed Christmas on the alleged day of the pagan celebration of the "Invincible Sun" (the "god" Sol Invictus), as a symbolic gesture, to mean that Christ is the Sun of Righteousness, and in order to replace the pagan feast by overlapping it.
To the contrary, historical studies have shown that "the separation of the feast of Christmas from the feast of Theophany, as well as the choice of December 25th as a day of celebration, were made for pragmatic ecclesiastical reasons and not for reasons of copying or competing against a pagan model." Historical sources and records regarding this issue prove that the ecclesiastical establishment of the feast of Christmas for December 25th (which was celebrated for the first time in Rome in 336 A.D.) preceded that of Sol Invictus, which was a celebration established by Emperor Julian the Apostate in around 362 A.D. for December 25th, which was to replace the older feast of the "Birth of the Invincible" (Natal Invicti), which was not the sun. This move by Julian the Apostate in establishing solar feasts, was most likely an attempt to replace the Christmas feast with his own feast of the sun, and not the other way around. To establish this fact, we refer to the interpretation of Saint John Chrysostom, who testifies that the Church of Rome knew through its archives, as the capital of the Roman Empire when Christ was born, the exact date of the census of Caesar Augustus, when Christ was born (Lk. 2:1-7). Chrysostom also goes into detail concerning the biblical events from the time the birth of John the Forerunner was announced to his father Zechariah until the birth of Christ.
In this brief study, we will describe exactly how the date for the birth of Christ was determined, with the guidance of Saint John Chrysostom, "the meadow of the words of inspired Scripture."...
Part I
Part II
Part III
Part IV
Summary of the Above Biblical Determinations
Based on the above hermeneutical calculations of St. John Chrysostom, it has been demonstrated that Zechariah, the father of John the Forerunner, according to the first chapter of the Gospel of Luke, offered incense in the Holy of Holies according to the prescribed ritual for the feast of Atonement, as a High Priest. In detail of this ritual, he entered the Holy of Holies alone, without being visible to the people, and he offered incense on the golden altar of incense, which is in between the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place (Holy of the Holies). Therefore this could not have been a daily offering of incense in the Holy Place, like all the priests would do on a daily basis, rather all the relevant facts point to the feast of Atonement, which was between September and October, for it was on this day only that the High Priest would be alone in the Sanctuary. Immediately after those days of Atonement and Tabernacles and upon the return of Zechariah to his home, Elizabeth conceived and became pregnant (cf. Lk. 1:24). Six months later, in March, the Son and Word of God was conceived by the Theotokos and the Holy Spirit (cf. Lk. 1:26). From this is determined nine months when Christ was born, a total of fifteen months since John the Forerunner was conceived, which falls in the end of December, in agreement with Church tradition.
The Testimony of the Church of Rome
In the same homily of St. John Chrysostom, "On the Day of the Birth of Our Savior Christ", he also invokes the testimony of the Church of Rome which celebrated the Nativity of Christ on December 25th, and this is why the homily bears the subtitle: "Which was then still uncertain, but a few years ago made known and proclaimed on the part of ones who came from the West."
Concerning this testimony, Chrysostom says: "It is clear that He was born during the first census. And it is possible for the one who desires to know exactly to read the original codices publicly stored at Rome and learn the time of the census. So what, someone says, is this to us - who are neither there nor present? But listen, and do not be unbelieving, because we have received the day from those who know these things accurately and who dwell in that city. For the ones living there, having observed it from the beginning and from ancient tradition, now have themselves transmitted the knowledge of it to us."35 The Saint goes on to explain how divine Providence caused the soul of Caesar Augustus to initiate the first census of the ecumene in order to fulfill the prophecies for the birth of Christ in Bethlehem, even though the Theotokos lived in Nazareth, and thus the power of God is revealed: "Did you notice, beloved, the economy of God, the way He manages His (purposes) through unbelievers as well as believers, that strangers to piety might learn His might and power."36
The Orthodox Acceptance of Hostile Interpretations
Despite the above evidence, typical is the opinion of the preeminent contemporary Greek liturgist John Fountoulis, who writes: "With the epiphany of false gods and emperors, the Christian Church opposed this with the epiphany of the true God and King Christ, the true theophany. Also the worship of the sun, which conquers during the winter solstice the darkness of night, was opposed with the worship of the true sun, Christ, who rose, as the prophet Isaiah said, in a world sitting in darkness and shadows." He speaks of how the feasts of Christmas and Theophany originated to replace feasts of the sun and the celebration of the winter solstice. It was by Christians replacing these winter pagan feasts, that the date for the Presentation of Christ forty days after His Nativity and the date for the Annunciation nine months before the Nativity, and even the conception of St. John the Forerunner in September originated. Thus, everything in our immoveable calendar for Professor Fountoulis begins with "Sol Invictis" during the winter solstice of December 21-22.
To the contrary, such misconceptions ignore historical facts and the biblical and patristic tradition to explain the origins of our liturgical feasts. That such a revered professor and liturgist would hold such opinions reveals that even Orthodox are under an academic/theological captivity that directly opposes Orthodox tradition, whether we are ignorant of the facts or not.
Epilogue: The Role of Divine Providence
To conclude, the feast of Christmas was not determined by Christian leaders to replace the worship of the invincible sun, but as St. John Chrysostom writes, it was according to the divine economy, divine Providence, that the God-man was born during the census of Caesar Augustus, as we previously mentioned, and that the Conception of the Forerunner that opens the Gospel of Luke, which led to creation being refashioned through the Incarnation, should fall in September, when the world is said to have been created and the new year began according to Hebrew calculations. For the symbolic significance of the census taking placing during the days of the Incarnation, and that it was not a coincidence, the sacred hymnographer writes: "When it was time for Your coming to earth, the first imperial taxation was held, but You also took a census, O Lord, recording the names of all men who believed in Your birth. You used the decree of Caesar for Your own end: to make manifest Your timeless and eternal Kingdom. Therefore we pay You our taxes, not with golden coins, but with the riches of Orthodox theology, O God and Savior of our souls."38 It was thus according to the economy of the Holy Trinity, and not a "coincidence" that these sacred events took place, nor are they merely a replacement of pagan feasts.
Sola_Fide
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2010
- Messages
- 31,482
Ignoring people is cowardly. I disagree a lot with TER, but one thing he always does is try to engage everyone who engages him. That's courageous.
TER
Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2008
- Messages
- 17,946
Thank you Sola for the kind words, but I must confess that with certain posters who love to troll, I find the best way to deal with them on an open forum is to simply ignore them. It's not out of cowardice however that I do this, but rather that I rather not waste time or be distracted by people's whose intentions are frankly evil and destructive.
Ronin Truth
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2013
- Messages
- 22,510
Sola_Fide
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2010
- Messages
- 31,482
Ugh...you are an idiot.
TER
Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2008
- Messages
- 17,946
Take this as friendly advice: sometimes it is better to ignore certain people who are not interested in friendly relations and healthy debate.
heavenlyboy34
Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2008
- Messages
- 59,093
Did you forget your meds when you posted this? ^^
dusman
Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2011
- Messages
- 2,376
Here's a pretty good presentation for a birth date in June corresponding to a rare Venus/Jupiter conjunction in 2BC to explain the star of Bethlehem. So far, it matches up well with other things I've been researching on the subject outside of the prior link I posted. Interesting enough, we had another conjunction of Venus/Jupiter this year on June 30, 2015, the first since 2BC! I'm going over Luke's account in regards to the other link I posted, so I'll compare to this as well.
June 30, 2015 Venus/Jupiter Conjunction pictured. This would have held significance to the magi as it is a very rare event and they most certainly would have taken interest. I came across it trying to find other notable astronomic events that could bring explanation to the star of Bethlehem. I'm not satisfied with the suggestion of a supernatural event or that it was a literal star (such as the contention of Sirius on Dec. 25th), but this one is compelling. Will have to see if it can be eliminated by Luke's chronology.
erowe1
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2007
- Messages
- 32,183
Here's a pretty good presentation for a birth date in June corresponding to a rare Venus/Jupiter conjunction in 2BC to explain the star of Bethlehem. So far, it matches up well with other things I've been researching on the subject outside of the prior link I posted. Interesting enough, we had another conjunction of Venus/Jupiter this year on June 30, 2015, the first since 2BC! I'm going over Luke's account in regards to the other link I posted, so I'll compare to this as well.
June 30, 2015 Venus/Jupiter Conjunction pictured. This would have held significance to the magi as it is a very rare event and they most certainly would have taken interest. I came across it trying to find other notable astronomic events that could bring explanation to the star of Bethlehem. I'm not satisfied with the suggestion of a supernatural event or that it was a literal star (such as the contention of Sirius on Dec. 25th), but this one is compelling. Will have to see if it can be eliminated by Luke's chronology.
How would a conjunction between Venus and Mars match the description of the star guiding the Magi to Bethlehem in Matthew 2?
dusman
Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2011
- Messages
- 2,376
Venus/Jupiter. Did you watch the video? It explains that quite clearly. The main challenges with what is described in scripture is that it must satisfy a few conditions:
- A significantly rare event to draw the attention of the magi and compel them to travel
- A star rising in the East or in the morning
- Once in Jerusalem, guide them south to Bethlehem
- Once in Bethlehem, must appear to have stood still
- Must have persisted over a period of time, to account for their travel "following" the star
- Able to determine this event as the coming of the birth of the King of Jews
A few days ago I made this observation:
I didn't at the time find anything specific with planetary conjunctions, so I was entertaining the inevitable final alternative of it being supernatural occurrence.
A planetary conjunction makes the most sense because it would have produced a potentially rare event in the sky, would have been under constant observation by magi of the time, and could create the unusual appearance of standing still. The video creator rightly explains that planets were considered wandering stars. asteres planetai (ἀστέρες πλανῆται) translates to wandering stars in Greek and asteres aplaneis (ἀστέρες ἀπλανεῖς) translates to fixed stars.
It makes sense that the magi would have observed such event as significant, dealing with a "merging" of wandering stars, aligning with Regulus in Leo, the King's star. If a Venus/Jupiter conjunction aligned perfectly on top of each other to the observer in 2BC (unlike the one this year on June 30th) it would have been very bright and been quite impressive, even by today's standards.
Most unusual is the final progression or "standing still" of Jupiter on December 25th in the southern sky. Wow.
Remember, after seeing the star the magi went WEST to Jerusalem to King Herod and asked where born was the new king of the Jews. They were then sent SOUTH to Bethlehem. This from a standpoint of what scripture says and the criteria a true celestial event must meet.. this is a compelling argument. I'm curious now how this matches up with Luke's account, which I'll hopefully get to tomorrow in regards to the other link that argues for a December 25th birth.
So far, from what I've researched... there might be the possibility of narrowing the timeframe down to a 3 month window. Elizabeth was 6 months pregnant with John the Baptist when Mary visited pregnant with Jesus. Between that meeting and Jesus birth, Joseph and Mary registered in the Census. There happens to be a few different "enrollments" and registrations within a 10 year period and that compared with scripture is a great place to test both theories.
Last edited:
TER
Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2008
- Messages
- 17,946
The movement of the star going south is part of the argument that this was not a celestial comet or star, but an angel in such an appearance.
The other part of the argument is that it descended directly over the manger, meaning it was specific enough and close enough to direct the Magi to the very dwelling which the Lord was in. (Which by the way, was in a house some time after the birth according to the Scriputres, even up to a year after His birth according to some of the Church Fathers, and not on December 25th which most Nativity plays place it.)
The other part of the argument is that it descended directly over the manger, meaning it was specific enough and close enough to direct the Magi to the very dwelling which the Lord was in. (Which by the way, was in a house some time after the birth according to the Scriputres, even up to a year after His birth according to some of the Church Fathers, and not on December 25th which most Nativity plays place it.)
Last edited:
dusman
Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2011
- Messages
- 2,376
Yes and that is why the video posted is compelling. It shows Jupiter completing its progression on December 25th in the south sky over Bethlehem. On December 26th it regresses to the position it was in on December 24th. That's just uncanny. Combined with the other observations with Virgo in September of 3BC (the conception month if June 17th is correct) there is some promise to this theory if we intend to prove scripture correct from a celestial standpoint.
If this isn't the celestial event described, then we must rest upon the conclusion that we are talking about a supernatural event like an angel or light similar to the burning bush ideal. I feel confident I've exhausted all other options from a celestial standpoint and this one will be fun to contrast with my other link's data.
TER
Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2008
- Messages
- 17,946
For Balaam laid before us precisely
The meaning of the words he spoke in prophecy,
When he said that a star would dawn,
A star that quenches all prophecies and auguries;
A star which resolves the parables of the wise,
And their sayings and their riddles,
A star far more brilliant than the star
Which has appeared, for he is the Maker of all the stars,
Of whom it was written of old, From Jacob there dawns
A little Child, God before the ages.
The meaning of the words he spoke in prophecy,
When he said that a star would dawn,
A star that quenches all prophecies and auguries;
A star which resolves the parables of the wise,
And their sayings and their riddles,
A star far more brilliant than the star
Which has appeared, for he is the Maker of all the stars,
Of whom it was written of old, From Jacob there dawns
A little Child, God before the ages.
St John Chrysostom:
For if we learn what the star was, and of what kind, whether it was one of the common stars, or strange and quite unlike the others, and whether it was a natural star or a star in appearance only, we shall easily know all the other things too. From where will these things be clear? From the texts themselves. Thus, that this star was not an ordinary one, or rather not a star at all, in my opinion, but some invisible power transformed into this appearance, is in the first place evident from its course. For not one of the stars moves like this, but whether you take the sun, or the moon, or all the other stars, we see them going from east to west; but this one was carried from north to south – for Palestine lies south of Persia. Next, one can also see this from the time. For it does not appear at night, but at midday, while the sun is shining; and no a star can do this, not even the moon. For when the sun appears the moon immediately disappears. But this star overcame even the beams of the sun by its own splendour, appearing brighter than them. Thirdly, from its appearing, and disappearing. For on their journey to Palestine it appeared leading them, but after they reached Jerusalem, it hid itself. But when they had left Herod and were about to leave, it shows itself; all of which is nothing like the motion of a star, but of some highly rational power. It did not even have a direction of its own, but when they moved, it moved; when they stopped, it stopped, like the pillar of the cloud for the Israelites. Fourthly, one can see this clearly, from its way of indicating. For it did not remain high up to point out the place – for they couldn’t have found it from that – but it came down and did so. For you realise that such a small space, about the size of a hut, or rather of the body of a little child, could not possibly be marked out by a star. For because of its immense height, it could not accurately indicate so confined a spot, and reveal it to those who wished to see it. And this any one may see from the moon, which is far larger than the stars, yet seems equally near every one that lives on the whole wide earth. How then, tell me, did the star point out a spot so confined, just the space of a manger and a hut, unless it left that height and came down, and stood over the very head of the young child? And this is what the evangelist was hinting at when he said, ‘The star went before them, till it came and stood over where the young Child was.’ Do you see then, by what a large number of proofs this star is shown not to be one of the many, nor to have shown itself according to the order of the visible creation?
Homily 6 on Matthew [PG 57:64}
TER
Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2008
- Messages
- 17,946
I remember reading about this years ago, namely the phenomenon regarding Juptier in the constellation of Leo which the Magi likely interpreted as a King being born from the tribe of Judah. It indeed is fascinating!
Last edited:
TER
Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2008
- Messages
- 17,946
The Magi traced out Jupiter, and realized that the child had been born. When they arrived at Herod (weeks/months? later), they already knew the King of the Jews had been born. They may have known because that Jupiter event (on December 25th) had passed.
Last edited:
erowe1
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2007
- Messages
- 32,183
It didn't just stand still. It stood over where the child was. It didn't just tell them to go south, but to a very specific place. This wasn't something out in space. It was low enough in the sky to indicate the specific house Jesus was in. I agree with TER's suggestion. This star was an angel, not something astronomical that we could identify with star charts.
Last edited:
Similar threads
