The non-pagan origins of Christmas.

Did you know that Christmas is a pagan holiday? It’s one of those “facts” that gets passed around during the Christmas season every year. Most people simply take it at face value. But this fact is a 19th-century creation. It arose at the same time as the myth that Easter was inspired by pagan celebrations was created.

So, if Christmas isn’t based on a pagan holiday, how did it come to be? For the first couple of centuries after the birth of Jesus, the celebration, or even the acknowledgment, of his birthday wasn’t important. When speaking of Jesus, what was important wasn’t the birth, or even the death, but the resurrection.

But even then, a specific date wasn’t the focus of the celebration. While the death and thus resurrection of Jesus was firmly set within the calendar year, the concept of the resurrection was celebrated throughout the year.

Christianity would grow, though, and with that, traditions formed. The birth of Jesus would never take on the theological significance that his death and resurrection did. After all, according to Paul, it was the resurrection specifically that this new faith was founded on.

Nevertheless, the birth of Jesus would take on some smaller significance. Enough that by the early third century, there were attempts to establish the date of Jesus’ birth. December 25th wasn’t in that mix, though.

Our earliest proposals for the date of Jesus’s birth are reported by Clement of Alexandria. Clement gives us a couple of proposed dates. Some said Jesus’s birth was on the 25^th day of the Egyptian month, Pachon, which would be May 20^th. Others said he was born on the 24^th or 25^th of Pharmuthi, or April 20^th or 21^st. Clement himself leaned more towards November 18^th.

The earliest views we have on when Jesus was born were largely focused on the Spring. Now, one might conclude that this was based on the birth narratives and the idea of shepherds out in their fields, but it was, in fact, theologically motivated.

A spring date for the birth of Jesus was proposed because creation was formed in the Spring. As on the first day of creation, as per Genesis, light and darkness were split into equal parts, it was argued that this meant creation began on the vernal equinox, when day and night become equal.

While the vernal equinox falls on March 21st in our modern calendar, it would have been March 25th in the Roman calendar. This, in turn, coincided with the death of Jesus. This was a theologically pleasing view as Jesus represented a new creation, so his birth on the same day that creation began made sense. More so, though, it added completeness to the life of Jesus. As Jesus was seen as perfect, he wouldn’t have lived a partial year, but instead, his life would have been full. He would die on the same day of the year in which he was born. It added a nice symmetry to the theology.

A different view would eventually win out, though, even though it was still fueled by the same theological concepts. Instead of a spring birth, though, Julius Africanus would claim that Jesus was actually born on December 25th. He reasoned that the actual beginning of Jesus’ life was not his birth but his conception. This would put the conception of Jesus on March 25^th, and 9 months after that, his birth would have been on December 25^th.

This idea of living full years is rooted in Judaism. The Talmud tells us that God calculates and completes the lifespan of a righteous person. This is taken from Exodus 23:26, which says, “I will complete the number of your days.”

The view was that each of us is entrusted with a mission at birth. A righteous person will live their life to their fullest potential and, in turn, complete their mission in the most perfect way possible. This perfection is shown by that individual finishing the mission they were entrusted with on the very same day it began.

However, that is only part of the story. While the birth of Jesus would be set on December 25^th, that was only in the western church. In the eastern portion of the church, a different date had been chosen, January 6^th.

January 6th, being observed as the birth of Jesus, or more specifically here, Christ, pre-dated the Western celebration of December 25th. For those in the eastern church, it was the celebration of the Epiphany, the day on which Jesus became incarnate and the Spirit of God entered Jesus. It was the day that Jesus became the Christ.

In the eastern church, this day of Christ’s birth has remained observed in several areas. So why did the East choose this date instead? For the same reason, the West chose December 25th. It was supposed to be nine months after Jesus’ death. While the West calculated that date as March 25th, the East placed it on April 6th.

Either way, the rationale for the date of Christ’s birth remained the same. It was theologically motivated in order to demonstrate the perfection of the mission Jesus was entrusted with. As a truly righteous individual, it only made sense that his life began on the same day that it ended.