We are a few days away from the biggest holiday of the so-called “Christian” year—Christmas. This event is of indisputably pagan origin. I have previously discussed why true Christians do not observe this proposed date of Christ’s birth (December 25).
This date, however, is traditionally used by both ancient and modern Gentiles to worship the “birth” of their sun god. Here is proof that Jesus Christ was definitely not born on December 25, but instead, sometime in the autumn.
There is much evidence available on this subject; but after the dust of studious research has cleared, the exact date of Christ’s birth still does not appear. One is left with the impression that God does not want people to celebrate such an occasion!
A strong case for thinking that the season of Christ’s birth most likely was autumn appears in Luke 2:8. Here we see that the sheep were still out in the fields at night. Some scholars argue that this refers to temple sheep, but that is not what this scripture states. Historically, winters were more severe in the land of Palestine than they are today, with frequent heavy snowfall not uncommon. Flocks were traditionally kept in various forms of shelters from about mid-October to mid-March.
For the benefit of a reading audience that may not have access to many references, allow us to quote portions of the note on this verse appearing in Clarke’s Commentary: “It was a custom among the Jews to send out their sheep to the deserts, about the passover, and bring them home at the commencement of the first rain: during the time they were out, the shepherds watched them night and day. As the passover occurred in the spring, and the first rain began early in the month of Marchesvan, which answers to part of our October and November, we find that the sheep were kept out in the open country during the whole of the summer. And as these shepherds had not yet brought home their flocks, it is a presumptive argument that October had not yet commenced, and that, consequently, our Lord was not born on the 25th of December, when no flocks would be out in the fields; nor could He have been born later than September, as the flocks were still in the fields by night. On this very ground the nativity in December should be given up. The feeding of the flocks by night in the fields is a chronological fact, which casts considerable light upon this disputed point …. The time in which Christ was born has been considered a subject of great importance among Christians. However, the matter has been considered of no moment by Him who inspired the evangelists; as not one hint is dropped on the subject, by which it might be possible even to guess nearly to the time, except the chronological fact mentioned above.”
Another piece to the puzzle is the fact that John the Baptist was six months older than his cousin Jesus (see Luke 1:26-27, 36). Biblical evidence tells us that John was conceived about mid-June and was therefore born in late March. Why? Because John’s father, Zacharias, was serving in the temple during the priestly course of Abia, or as it is referred to in the Old Testament, Abijah (1 Chronicles 24:10), when the angel appeared to him to bring him the great news of his son’s arrival (Luke 1:5). (A study of and by itself: Remember when sequencing these courses that the priests would serve a common course with the other priests in addition to their own during the holy day seasons.) Add six months to this time and Jesus’s birth must have occurred in mid-September, or at least sometime in early autumn.
Further support for this assertion is that Jerusalem and the surrounding towns were very crowded with visitors at the time that Jesus was born—His parents had to take refuge in a stable for there was no room at the inn. Scholars who do not know about (or believe in) God’s master plan as portrayed by His annual holy days, attribute this mass gathering solely for the purpose of collecting taxes after the fall harvest. What they are missing is that many people filled Jerusalem at the time of the fall holy day season. These autumn festivals took place in the seventh month of the sacred year (Leviticus 23), corresponding to our September-October. Luke 2:41 and John 7:1-10 show that it was the custom for Jesus’s parents to travel from Nazareth to Jerusalem for this sacred gathering.
These are just a few of the convincing proofs that Jesus was born sometime in the early autumn, not in the dead of winter when the pagans observed, and still celebrate, the birth of Nimrod.
Referring to the prophetic dream Queen Maya had prior to conception, some versions of the life story of the Buddha say that he was conceived without sexual activity. This interpretation has led to parallels being drawn with the birth story of Jesus.
The story of the birth of the Buddha was known in the West, and possibly influenced the story of the birth of Jesus. Saint Jerome (4th century CE) mentions the birth of the Buddha, who he says "was born from the side of a virgin". Also a fragment of Archelaos of Carrha (278 CE) mentions the Buddha's virgin-birth.
Other parallels in the birth stories include:
* The similarity in the sounds of the names of Mary (Aramaic: מרים, Maryām) and Maya.
* Maya conceived during a dream, Mary conceived around the time of a visitation from an angel.
* Both women gave birth "outside" of a home.
* Heavenly wonders appeared in the sky.
* Heavenly beings (angels or devas; or in some Mahayana traditions, Samantabhadra) announcing the newborn as "savior" of the world.
* Sages came to visit the newborn and make prophecies of auspicious careers.
There are also parallels between the Buddha being born of Maya and the Greek messenger god Hermes being born of a mother with a similar name, the goddess Maia, since Hermes is associated with the planet Mercury, a planet called Budha in Sanskrit.
But peep will believe what they will, Marry Xmas DTVers.
- Related topics
- Last post