D
Darryl_B
Guest
Sometimes if you copy and paste the internet you can miss the forest for the trees.
- Status
P
patrick457
Guest
In my defense, it wasn’t purely copypasta. But you’re right - I am missing the forest for the trees. I have for all these years.
D
Darryl_B
Guest
One thing I find interesting about modern scholarship, is that tradition is never enough unless there is a document to support the tradition. One document is considered sufficient evidence for a global consensus, however 1000’s of oral tradition passed on generation to generation by people who had no compulsion to write, generally don’t count for anything. The weight distribution between written and oral has become grossly misplaced since the invention of printing and the education of reading. (It is a common thing among some Protestant denominations where they all have to turn to the book chapter verse that the reader is about to read. Why? Do they not trust the reader? Don’t take my word for it see for yourself.)
The second thing I find interesting is that the question of Christmas only began to be doubted by Puritans (1600s), a Calvinist Protestant bunch who at the time would have been oblivious that the falsehoods they invented concerning the construct of Christmas were eventually going to be regurgitated ad nausea by atheists.
The travel to America of course brought an opportunity to remove Christmas and Easter from the Calendar and instead replace it with what is customarily referred to as Thanksgiving. Christmas became a holiday about 10 years later. Easter never did.
There is sufficient reason to believe 25th Chislev according to the Jewish Calendar was the date considered the birth, there is also sufficiently good reason for that date rather than any other date. Celebrating the birth of Jesus Christ on the day that the Jews were doing something would be a great way to witness. The Jewish Calendar was not used as a normal Calendar, therefore the time that Christmas was instituted must have been very very early in a significantly Jewish environment.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
You don’t think that the Roman holiday of the Saturnalia factors into the decision to set the date of Christmas?
D
Darryl_B
Guest
You mean Macrobius?
P
patrick457
Guest
That still leaves us with the fact that December 25th is historically just one of the various dates early Christians celebrated the birth of Jesus in. This has nothing to do with Puritans or modern scholarship - the early sources attest to or imply dates such as January 6th (the standard date in the East by the 4th-5th century before the adoption of the December date; Armenians still keep the Nativity on this day), April 2nd (Hippolytus), January 10th or January 6th or April 20th-21st or May 20th or November 17th-18th (all referred to in Clement of Alexandria’s writings) a May date, maybe May 15th (inferred from some Armenian lectionaries which place the feast of the Holy Innocents on May 18th). December 25th could have very well been historically one of the more correct guesses, but it’s hardly the only date Christians posited Jesus was born.
Guess what? The April 2nd and the May dates, at least, also would also fit a Jewish context. I mentioned the Book of Jubilees earlier: in that book, Isaac is said to have been born to Sarah on Pentecost (which was fixed by Jubilees on May 15th - exactly nine months after August 15th, the probable original date of the Annunciation/Incarnation in Jerusalem) and was nearly sacrificed by Abraham around Passover. Jubilees is a well-known to early Christians and was held in high regard, and Isaac is seen as a type of Christ; who’s to say that Jubilees did not influence the Jerusalem liturgical calendar?
There’s another Jewish tradition though which says that Isaac was actually born on the Passover. For some early Christians like Hippolytus, this would fit in full circle for Jesus as well: apparently it’s fitting that He is both born and crucified during Passover. That explains the April 2nd date: it is one of the eight possible dates for Passover/Easter given on the paschal table in Hippolytus’ statue. Another is March 25th, which is there specified as the date of Jesus’ crucifixion. (This is an idea also found in Hippolytus’ commentary on Daniel as well as in Tertullian.) As per the table, a Pasch of April 2nd will be followed thirty years later by one on March 25th. In the Liber Generationis (a Latin translation of Hippolytus’ Greek Chronica) Jesus was said to have been born on Passover, thirty years before the Passover of the crucifixion.
And before you ask, no, this is not copypaste.
P
patrick457
Guest
Saturnalia (December 17th-23rd) does not fall on the exact day as the December date. You must be thinking about the Natalis Sol Invicti, the birthday of Sol Invictus (the Unconquered Sun). But the problem is, we don’t know for sure if the Christian holiday did copy the pagan date or the other way around. Granted, the idea that Christians took over the supposedly-originally pagan date is not new; a medieval scribe who copied a work of Syrian bishop Jacob Bar-Salibi (12th century) wrote an annotation to the manuscript:
It was a custom of the Pagans to celebrate on the same 25 December the birthday of the Sun, at which they kindled lights in token of festivity. In these solemnities and revelries the Christians also took part. Accordingly when the doctors of the Church perceived that the Christians had a leaning to this festival, they took counsel and resolved that the true Nativity should be solemnised on that day.
But whether historically this was the case, we aren’t sure.
D
Darryl_B
Guest
Sorry, that last post was two seconds I had available, now I have more time. I would just like to say that you have fallen exactly into that which I said, regurgitate without question. Who are you going to believe? The Church? Maybe Puritans? Saturnalia was over by 23rd December, started 17th, exactly how do you get 25th from 17th - 23rd. How much window of error are you prepared to assign. But that anyway was when it was a week long thing, there were decrees that it was only allowed to be 3 days, as it disrupted society too much. The time was taken from the end not the beginning.
But perhaps read Macrobius. It is actually his writing, not the date itself that led to the rather obscure assignment that you are regurgitating.
D
Darryl_B
Guest
In yet, it was the 25th Chislev (in the Jewish Calendar). As I said, oral tradition is far bigger than scholarship, and in this case for good reason, for the reasons I have already expressed.That still leaves us with the fact that December 25th is historically just one of the various dates early Christians celebrated the birth of Jesus in. This has nothing to do with Puritans or modern scholarship - the early sources attest to or imply dates such as January 6th (the standard date in the East by the 4th-5th century before the adoption of the December date; Armenians still keep the Nativity on this day), April 2nd (Hippolytus), January 10th or January 6th or April 20th-21st or May 20th or November 17th-18th (all referred to in Clement of Alexandria’s writings) a May date, maybe May 15th (inferred from some Armenian lectionaries which place the feast of the Holy Innocents on May 18th). December 25th could have very well been historically one of the more correct guesses, but it’s hardly the only date Christians posited Jesus was born.
Guess what? The April 2nd and the May dates, at least, also would also fit a Jewish context. I mentioned the Book of Jubilees earlier: in that book, Isaac is said to have been born to Sarah on Pentecost (which was fixed by Jubilees on May 15th - exactly nine months after August 15th, the probable original date of the Annunciation/Incarnation in Jerusalem) and was nearly sacrificed by Abraham around Passover. Jubilees is a well-known to early Christians and was held in high regard, and Isaac is seen as a type of Christ; who’s to say that Jubilees did not influence the Jerusalem liturgical calendar?
There’s another Jewish tradition though which says that Isaac was actually born on the Passover. For some early Christians like Hippolytus, this would fit in full circle for Jesus as well: apparently it’s fitting that He is both born and crucified during Passover. That explains the April 2nd date: it is one of the eight possible dates for Passover/Easter given on the paschal table in Hippolytus’ statue. Another is March 25th, which is there specified as the date of Jesus’ crucifixion. (This is an idea also found in Hippolytus’ commentary on Daniel as well as in Tertullian.) As per the table, a Pasch of April 2nd will be followed thirty years later by one on March 25th. In the Liber Generationis (a Latin translation of Hippolytus’ Greek Chronica) Jesus was said to have been born on Passover, thirty years before the Passover of the crucifixion.
And before you ask, no, this is not copypaste.
P
patrick457
Guest
Okay, so somehow those other ideas - some of which could very well be products of oral tradition themselves - don’t count? Not even January 6th? (I still fail to see what ‘scholarship’ - I’m assuming modern scholarship - has to do with that.)
Correct me if I’m wrong here, but I hope you aren’t under the impression that all early Christians (specifically, 3rd-5th century Christians) everywhere shared all the same feasts and celebrated them on the same dates. There’s Easter, yes, but even that was the subject of disagreement on one or two occasions.
P.S. Is your connecting December 25th with the 25th of Kislev somehow connected with Hanukkah?
D
Darryl_B
Guest
My friend, I keep emphasizing Jewish Calendar, and the festival associated with that date in the Jewish Calendar. The fact that it can be traced back to a Jewish Calendar means that there were people there who knew, in a location that was Jewish where that Calendar was known and observed, that can only be Israel probably pre-AD70.
Easter was not a subject of disagreement. It is a subject of disagreement now between Christian and the Jewish every now and then, only because the Jewish chose to formulate a method for calculation which was different than the Christian one. Subsequently the Jewish people will occasionally celebrate Easter one month later than the Christian.
D
Darryl_B
Guest
Keep reading down that path, my friend.
P
patrick457
Guest
That still doesn’t explain the existence of multiple dates, though. Even if you disregard most of the other ones, I think the two ‘standard’ dates - going by 4th-5th century standards - are December 25th (the Roman date) and January 6th (the original Eastern date - including Jerusalem). Yes, we could suppose that the December 25th date is oral tradition, but it was hardly the only tradition out there.
I thought it was the Christians who decided that they will no longer follow the Jewish way of calculation (at least, that’s how I read Nicaea)? And yes, the Jewish method of calculation did probably change a bit after the time of Jesus.
Now I’m curious.
Any possible reasons why Hanukkah could be chosen as a candidate for the date of Jesus’ birth?
D
Darryl_B
Guest
There was no formula to calculate Easter. It was calculated by observation, by walking outside and observing the sky. This was then communicated orally to the nation. The problem arose for the Jewish community when they were in a state of disporia, and communication was not so possible, so the Jewish leaders formulated a method of calculating the date of Easter in order to simplify the process. The Council of Nicaea set Easter calculations, but to uniform Christian, not uniform with the Jewish, and so the two combined methods (Christian and Jewish) provide most years the same date for Easter, but occasionally the Jewish Passover is one month later, meaning that they are celebrating the second Passover/Easter.
Yes there is, it is perfect. And no is was not just a candidate.Now I’m curious.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
According to:
simpletoremember.com/vitals/Christmas_TheRealStory.htm
“In the 4th century CE, Christianity imported the Saturnalia festival hoping to take the pagan masses in with it. Christian leaders succeeded in converting to Christianity large numbers of pagans by promising them that they could continue to celebrate the Saturnalia as Christians.”
" The problem was that there was nothing intrinsically Christian about Saturnalia. To remedy this, these Christian leaders named Saturnalia’s concluding day, December 25th, to be Jesus’ birthday."
simpletoremember.com/vitals/Christmas_TheRealStory.htm
“In the 4th century CE, Christianity imported the Saturnalia festival hoping to take the pagan masses in with it. Christian leaders succeeded in converting to Christianity large numbers of pagans by promising them that they could continue to celebrate the Saturnalia as Christians.”
" The problem was that there was nothing intrinsically Christian about Saturnalia. To remedy this, these Christian leaders named Saturnalia’s concluding day, December 25th, to be Jesus’ birthday."
P
patrick457
Guest
Again, you’re ignoring the fact that the East in the late 4th century up to the early 5th celebrated it on January 6th, as testified by sources such as the pilgrim Egeria, St. Epiphanius of Salamis, and St. John Cassian. (I can give you the quotes if you ask.)
And earlier than that, you have Clement of Alexandria reporting the case in 3rd century Egypt (Stromata 1.21):
From Julius Caesar, therefore, to the death of Commodus, are two hundred and thirty-six years, six months. And the whole from Romulus, who founded Rome, till the death of Commodus, amounts to nine hundred and fifty-three years, six months. And our Lord was born in the twenty-eighth year, when first the census was ordered to be taken in the reign of Augustus. And to prove that this is true, it is written in the Gospel by Luke as follows: “And in the fifteenth year, in the reign of Tiberius Caesar, the word of the Lord came to John, the son of Zacharias.” And again in the same book: “And Jesus was coming to His baptism, being about thirty years old,” and so on. And that it was necessary for Him to preach only a year, this also is written: “He hath sent Me to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.” This both the prophet spake, and the Gospel. Accordingly, in fifteen years of Tiberius and fifteen years of Augustus; so were completed the thirty years till the time He suffered. And from the time that He suffered till the destruction of Jerusalem are forty-two years and three months; and from the destruction of Jerusalem to the death of Commodus (= December 31, 192), a hundred and twenty-eight years, ten months, and three days. From the birth of Christ, therefore, to the death of Commodus are, in all, a hundred and ninety-four years, one month, thirteen days. (= November 18th, 3 BC) And there are those who have determined not only the year of our Lord’s birth, but also the day; and they say that it took place in the twenty-eighth year of Augustus, and in the twenty-fifth day of Pachon (= May 20th). And the followers of Basilides hold the day of his baptism as a festival, spending the night before in readings. And they say that it was the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, the fifteenth day of the month Tubi (= January 10th); and some that it was the eleventh of the same month (= January 6th). And treating of His passion, with very great accuracy, some say that it took place in the sixteenth year of Tiberius, on the twenty-fifth of Phamenoth (= April 2nd); and others the twenty-fifth of Pharmuthi and others say that on the nineteenth of Pharmuthi (= March 14th) the Saviour suffered. Further, others say that He was born on the twenty-fourth or twenty-fifth of Pharmuthi (= April 19th/20th).
And again, there’s Hippolytus’ April 2nd date. And the March 28th date of De Pascha Computus.
You’re insisting that the December 25th date is perfect and is oral tradition, but you do not explain why these other alternative dates existed (or in the case of January 6th, still exist - see Armenian Christians). So far, you’ve only complained about modern scholarship and Puritans rejecting the celebration of Christians, but that doesn’t really address the issue. We’re not talking about just one document here. No offense, but do you even read what I am writing?
P.S. Back to Easter: have you heard of the Quartodecimans?
P.S. #2: What makes the December 25th date more special aside from the putative connection to Hanukkah?
P
patrick457
Guest
For the Savior was born during the forty-second year of the Roman emperor Augustus - in the thirteenth consulship of the same Octavian Augustus and the consulship of Silanus, as the Roman consul lists indicate. For these say as follows: “During their consulships,” I mean Octavian’s thirteenth and the consulship of Silanus, “Christ was born on the eighth before the Ides of January =January 6], thirteen days after the winter solstice and the increase of the light and the day.” Greeks, I mean the idolaters, celebrate this day [the solstice] on the eighth before the Kalends of January =December 25], which Romans call Saturnalia, Egyptians Cronia, and Alexandrians, Cicellia. For this division between signs of the zodiac, which is a solstice, comes on the eighth before the Kalends of January, and the day begins to lengthen because the light is receiving its increase. And it completes a period of thirteen days until the eighth before the Ides of January, the day of Christ’s birth, with a thirtieth of an hour added to each day.
The Syrian sage, Ephrem, testified to this calculation in his commentaries when he said, “Thus the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ, his birth in the flesh or perfect incarnation which is called the Epiphany, was revealed after a space of thirteen days from the beginning of the increase of the light. For this too must needs be a type of the number of our Lord Jesus Christ and his twelve disciples, since, [added to the disciples], he made up < the > number of the thirteen days of the light’s increase.” …]
I have been obliged to prove this with many examples because of those who do not believe that “The Epiphany” is a good name for the fleshly birth of our Savior, who was born at the eighth hour and manifested, by the angels’ testimony, to the shepherds and the world - but he was manifested to Mary and Joseph as well. And the star was manifested to the magi in the east at that hour, two years before their arrival at Jerusalem and Bethlehem, when Herod asked the magi themselves the precise time of the star’s manifestation, and they told him it was no more than two years before. And this very word gave the Epiphany its name, from Herod’s saying, “the manifestation of the star.” Thus when the magi said, “Where is he that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the east and are come to worship him,” (Matthew 2:2) Herod say that he had not been inquiring about the name of a merely human king.
…] And so, after completing his thirtieth year in which he was baptized, and after completing his thirty-first by preaching for an entire “acceptable year” without opposition, but [then] preaching another year with opposition, to the accompaniment of persecution and hatred: and after completing [part of] another year after it, a full seventy-four days from his birthday, - (the Epiphany, January 5 at the dawn of January 6 and the eleventh of the Egyptian month Tybi) - until the thirteenth before the Kalends of April, as I said, < on that same thirteenth before the Kalends of April, > the twenty-fourth of the Egyptian month Phamenoth, he had attained a full thirty-two years, plus seventy-four days from the Epiphany. And he rose on the twenty-sixth of the Egyptian month Phamenoth - (this was the day of the equinox and was preceded by the night and the equinox) - the day which followed the twenty-fifth of Phamenoth, the eleventh before the Kalends of April, < and appeared to his disciples. > This makes liars of all who are not sons of truth.
N.B.: My point is not really to say that December 25th is not a good candidate or to say that celebrating it on this day is bad or something like that; only that there there do exist other dates early Christians thought Jesus was born in before most Christians adopted the December date (and not all adopted it). I don’t think pointing out that some sources do provide different dates is tantamount to denying Christmas or the Incarnation. It’s just a fact that December 25th was not the only candidate during the first four to five centuries.
I think I’ve pretty much said what I have to say - no point in repeating and copypasting.
If you’ll excuse me, I’ll withdraw from this thread to prevent us from being in a more messy situation. Thanks and God bless.
The Syrian sage, Ephrem, testified to this calculation in his commentaries when he said, “Thus the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ, his birth in the flesh or perfect incarnation which is called the Epiphany, was revealed after a space of thirteen days from the beginning of the increase of the light. For this too must needs be a type of the number of our Lord Jesus Christ and his twelve disciples, since, [added to the disciples], he made up < the > number of the thirteen days of the light’s increase.” …]
I have been obliged to prove this with many examples because of those who do not believe that “The Epiphany” is a good name for the fleshly birth of our Savior, who was born at the eighth hour and manifested, by the angels’ testimony, to the shepherds and the world - but he was manifested to Mary and Joseph as well. And the star was manifested to the magi in the east at that hour, two years before their arrival at Jerusalem and Bethlehem, when Herod asked the magi themselves the precise time of the star’s manifestation, and they told him it was no more than two years before. And this very word gave the Epiphany its name, from Herod’s saying, “the manifestation of the star.” Thus when the magi said, “Where is he that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the east and are come to worship him,” (Matthew 2:2) Herod say that he had not been inquiring about the name of a merely human king.
…] And so, after completing his thirtieth year in which he was baptized, and after completing his thirty-first by preaching for an entire “acceptable year” without opposition, but [then] preaching another year with opposition, to the accompaniment of persecution and hatred: and after completing [part of] another year after it, a full seventy-four days from his birthday, - (the Epiphany, January 5 at the dawn of January 6 and the eleventh of the Egyptian month Tybi) - until the thirteenth before the Kalends of April, as I said, < on that same thirteenth before the Kalends of April, > the twenty-fourth of the Egyptian month Phamenoth, he had attained a full thirty-two years, plus seventy-four days from the Epiphany. And he rose on the twenty-sixth of the Egyptian month Phamenoth - (this was the day of the equinox and was preceded by the night and the equinox) - the day which followed the twenty-fifth of Phamenoth, the eleventh before the Kalends of April, < and appeared to his disciples. > This makes liars of all who are not sons of truth.
- Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion (370s-380s), 51, 22.3-7, 12-14; 27.4-6
- St. John Cassian, Conference (420) 10.2
N.B.: My point is not really to say that December 25th is not a good candidate or to say that celebrating it on this day is bad or something like that; only that there there do exist other dates early Christians thought Jesus was born in before most Christians adopted the December date (and not all adopted it). I don’t think pointing out that some sources do provide different dates is tantamount to denying Christmas or the Incarnation. It’s just a fact that December 25th was not the only candidate during the first four to five centuries.
I think I’ve pretty much said what I have to say - no point in repeating and copypasting.
If you’ll excuse me, I’ll withdraw from this thread to prevent us from being in a more messy situation. Thanks and God bless.
I
Ignatius
Guest
The dates are based on the best information available. We certainly know that Pascha (what Luther termed Easter) was at the time of the celebration of the Hebrew Passover. Since the Hebrew is a Lunar calendar, the day would float around and so the celebration of the Holy Pascha was fixed on a Sunday which is when it occurred.
D
Darryl_B
Guest
That information is entirely false. Though conspiracy theories are wonderful things.
I assume you read Macrobius rather than just googling until you found a site which contains information you would like to contain some shred of truth, sorry I mean until you found a site which contains information that is agreeable to your world-view.
As I said, none of this false information arose until the Puritans of the 1600s suddenly became obsessed with discrediting the Catholic Church, and they did this in the most ingenious way, they invented falsehoods that could not be validated from history, that the Catholic Church had paganized itself. Result was as expected, unfortunately the future consequence of attempting to discredit the Catholic Church was that they unwittingly also gave opportunity to discredit the birth of Jesus Christ. By calling that into question which is also the birth of Chritianity itself, it has then back-fired.
D
Darryl_B
Guest
Did they follow the Jewish Calendar? The concept of Epiphany can be confused to either mean the manifestation of his birth, or the manifestation to the Gentiles. So if there were to be a misunderstanding,
If we take out the dates that exclude the Baptism and Passion we are left with the above. 25th of Pachon is the 25th of the 9th month of the Egyptian calendar, what it equates to in our calendar is not important. It is the 25th of the 9th month of the Egyptian calendar.
Now consider that the 25th of the 9th month of the Jewish calendar is 25th of Chislev, see what they did there?
No offense, but do you?
I have already answered this.
More special than Hanukkah? There is one question that one must ask oneself. Does God work in random ways, or does God work in planned ways. One would represent a God of chaos, the second would represent a God of order, revealing his intentions and plans through signs and wonders.
- Status