History Christian festivities and their originality

Lord Sovereign

Well-known member
Following on from an enlightening discussion that somewhat derailed another thread, I’ve put this up here so that conversation can continue. As it turns out, a lot of ideas about Christianity essentially nicking half its festivals and celebrations off of Pagans isn’t exactly true. Indeed, things like Christmas are fully Christian inventions and not appropriations.

Who’d have thunk?
 

Bigking321

Well-known member
I was honestly fine with the idea of Christian holidays absorbing various traditions and such from pagan holidays. God redeems and such. No big deal.

Wouldn't really be surprised about it being exaggerated. A lot of the stuff people say about Christianity, especially historically, is said with a agenda and not much factual basis.
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
Well, we do have absolute proof that Jesus wasn't born anywhen near December so the date adopted must be associated with something else.

We know per Luke 1:8-13 that Zachariah, father of John the Baptist, was a priest serving in the Course of Abijah when Gabriel visited him. Now the courses were specific periods of temple service, each being done from Sabbath to Sabbath once a year. The course of Abijah matches to June 13-19. Luke 1:23 shows that Elizabeth became pregnant with John immediately after that, so around the last week of June.

Elizabeth was six months pregnant when Mary was visited by Gabriel, per Luke 1:26. We can thus calculate the time of Jesus' birth by taking 6+9 months from the last week of June. It puts John, not Jesus, as being born around March/April, and Jesus himself as being born in late September/Early October.

This is further backed up by the historical evidence the bible itself provides. Shepherds were tending their flocks at night when Jesus was born, but Shepherds did not do so during Chislev when it was very cold and wet. The month of Chislev in the Jewish Calender roughly equates to December (with some overlap into November) and bible accounts show pretty clearly what it was like. Jeremiah 36:22 has King Jehoiakim sitting in his winter home huddling by a brazier in that month, and Ezra 10:9-13 has Ezra shivering from the rain and cold during Chislev.

Additionally, Joseph and Mary rather famously traveled to Bethlehem for a census and were there for Jesus' birth, and we have ample Roman records showing that they did not conduct the census in winter (it would have been pointless as people would have had extreme difficulty traveling to take the census due to the bad weather).

As for why December 25, on December 25, 274AD, Emperor Aurelian reformed the sun worship in Rome and dedicated a temple to Sol Invictus. He also instituted the Festival of Dies Natalis Solis Invicti to be celebrated on the 25th of December. Given several other Roman holidays took place very close to then, such as the Saturnalia for a week ending on the 23rd, where Romans would exchange sprigs of holly and decorate their homes with it, among several other customs that were integrated into Christmas. Several elements of the Sol Invictus cult were integrated into Christian worship, such as applying Haloes to revered figures. We even have a few pieces of archaeological art directly showing the integration of Sol Invictus into Christianity, such as this 3rd-century mural found at St. Peter's Basilica:


Over time other pagan festivals were also incorporated, we even still use the term Yule, taken directly from a Germanic winter festival to Odin and the origin of the "Christmas Tree" and Yule Log.
 

S'task

Renegade Philosopher
Administrator
Staff Member
Founder
As for why December 25, on December 25, 274AD, Emperor Aurelian reformed the sun worship in Rome and dedicated a temple to Sol Invictus. He also instituted the Festival of Dies Natalis Solis Invicti to be celebrated on the 25th of December. Given several other Roman holidays took place very close to then, such as the Saturnalia for a week ending on the 23rd, where Romans would exchange sprigs of holly and decorate their homes with it, among several other customs that were integrated into Christmas. Several elements of the Sol Invictus cult were integrated into Christian worship, such as applying Haloes to revered figures. We even have a few pieces of archaeological art directly showing the integration of Sol Invictus into Christianity, such as this 3rd-century mural found at St. Peter's Basilica:

Over time other pagan festivals were also incorporated, we even still use the term Yule, taken directly from a Germanic winter festival to Odin and the origin of the "Christmas Tree" and Yule Log.
Nope. There's a lot around to debunk this. Here's a lengthy one that also goes into the Mythras claimed about Christmas but also covers the Sol Invictus stuff as well.

TLDR: Sol Invictus appears to have originated LATER than Christians celebrating Christmas on Dec. 25th. Christian celebrating Christmas on Dec 25th comes rather from a Jewish and Christian tradition which basically held that Prophets and such anointed died at the same date they were concieved. The Annunciation thus Christ's conception was traditionally held to be on March 25th... add nine months to March 25th and... oh look, we're smack on December 25th.

And the classic claim about the Christmas tree and Yule logs being pagan in origin. Here's a previously linked site going over a bunch of the myths. Here's a more specific debunking of the Yule ties to Christmas, which goes over known Yule traditions and see how many appear as part of Christmas (protip: one tentative link of serving boar to Christmas ham and... well... that's REALLY tentative) and even goes into how the oldest references to what became known as the "Yule Log" didn't actually reference Yule but were referencing... wait for it... CHRISTMAS with no mention of Yule or "Yule Log" AT ALL. In point of fact, there's more connecting Yule to how we celebrate NEW YEARS than to how we celebrate Christmas in the west (which actually makes sense seeing how Yule was, actually a NEW YEARS feast).

As to the Christmas tree... there's actually no evidence of pagan origins for Christmas tree, but a lot for Christian origins, and a much later origin than any other traditions, as the first records of Christmas trees did not appear until the 16th century. There's not any evidence for decorating tree and bringing them into homes in any major pagan tradition. Rather it appears to have originated from the use of Paradise Trees in Advent Plays, with people decorating the Paradise trees with treats to represent the fruit of life and fruit of knowledge. The earliest scholarship trying to claim pagan origins again goes back to the late 19th century romantics whom were TERRIBLE at all things science, but especially archeology. As I noted in the thread this spun off of, if the idea about Christianity originated in the late 19th century, disregard it, 99% of the time it's wrong and a result of purposeful misrepresentation meant to tear down Christianity and not based in actual historical fact.
 

Val the Moofia Boss

Well-known member
Even if the folk traditions of Christmas were pagan in origin, practicing them today would not be pagan worship. For it to be pagan, it would have to be religious. It would have to be directed towards the pagan gods. Nobody today worships the pagan gods like yggdrasil. Nobody puts up a Christmas tree thinking that they are honoring some Norse mythological god. Folk tradition just means a tradition of the people. It does not mean that they are worshipping some pantheistic god. It just means that they brought their folk traditions with them when they became Christians.

If you really want to get technical about it, a Christmas tree is more Christian than yggdrasil. Yggdrasil is an ash tree. A Christmas tree is a cedar tree. What was Christ's temple built out of? The cedars of Lebanon. The poles of the Ark were made of cedar. The use of cedar is very specifically mentioned in the Bible.
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
Nope. There's a lot around to debunk this. Here's a lengthy one that also goes into the Mythras claimed about Christmas but also covers the Sol Invictus stuff as well.

TLDR: Sol Invictus appears to have originated LATER than Christians celebrating Christmas on Dec. 25th. Christian celebrating Christmas on Dec 25th comes rather from a Jewish and Christian tradition which basically held that Prophets and such anointed died at the same date they were concieved. The Annunciation thus Christ's conception was traditionally held to be on March 25th... add nine months to March 25th and... oh look, we're smack on December 25th.

And the classic claim about the Christmas tree and Yule logs being pagan in origin. Here's a previously linked site going over a bunch of the myths. Here's a more specific debunking of the Yule ties to Christmas, which goes over known Yule traditions and see how many appear as part of Christmas (protip: one tentative link of serving boar to Christmas ham and... well... that's REALLY tentative) and even goes into how the oldest references to what became known as the "Yule Log" didn't actually reference Yule but were referencing... wait for it... CHRISTMAS with no mention of Yule or "Yule Log" AT ALL. In point of fact, there's more connecting Yule to how we celebrate NEW YEARS than to how we celebrate Christmas in the west (which actually makes sense seeing how Yule was, actually a NEW YEARS feast).

As to the Christmas tree... there's actually no evidence of pagan origins for Christmas tree, but a lot for Christian origins, and a much later origin than any other traditions, as the first records of Christmas trees did not appear until the 16th century. There's not any evidence for decorating tree and bringing them into homes in any major pagan tradition. Rather it appears to have originated from the use of Paradise Trees in Advent Plays, with people decorating the Paradise trees with treats to represent the fruit of life and fruit of knowledge. The earliest scholarship trying to claim pagan origins again goes back to the late 19th century romantics whom were TERRIBLE at all things science, but especially archeology. As I noted in the thread this spun off of, if the idea about Christianity originated in the late 19th century, disregard it, 99% of the time it's wrong and a result of purposeful misrepresentation meant to tear down Christianity and not based in actual historical fact.
Nonsense, Sol Invictus was initiated in 274 AD. The earliest known Christmas celebration was 336 AD, far later. Claiming the Sol Invictus celebration came later is blatant revisionist history and complete falsehood. Note that your sources don't remotely support the claims you're making, they're basically going "Well really Christianity started in Genesis 3:15 so wayyyy! older," coupled with "We don't have the actual records, only copies of them dating all the way back to 274, so the oldest known intact calendar is later." Incredibly weak and deceptive arguments, as expected of those trying to support untruth.

Your links have no serious facts in them, they're just saying "X is so" with no research, no backing, and a heck of a lot of reaching. I'm particularly amused by that last one, it's literally just the author ranting about how ancient pagans weren't really environmentalists as we know them today (true enough) and therefore they didn't care about trees (false) so they couldn't have been the origin of Christmas trees (even Reed Richards would call that a stretcher). "I found a website on google that supports my pre-assumed ideas" isn't actually useful data. We know straight up that German Pagans worshipped trees.


Even many Christian Traditions dating back centuries have connections between the German Yule and the incorporation of those pagan traditions into the Yule Log and Christmas Tree. F'rex Saint Boniface, Apostle to Germany, is sometimes credited as creating the first Christmas tree to integrate German pagans into Christianity. The modern tree decorated with lights originates with Lutheran customs in the Rennaisance connected too... German pagan customs they integrated.

As far as conception, there's nothing biblical about saying he was conceived on March 25th, and since the bible itself establishes quite thoroughly that Jesus wasn't born on December 25th that means there must have been something else that pushed them to choose such a date. Perhaps a pre-existing celebration to coopt. The evidence is too overwhelming for it to be anything else, too many elements from the pre-existing celebrations from Holly to Haloes to the Yule Log and Yule Tree to Santa being identified with Odin.

None of these things are biblical, they're just "This bunch of men said this centuries later" and one simply picks which bunch of men they decide to listen to (American Puritans actually forbade Christmas due to its Pagan components). One who chooses to listen to the bible instead of men, though, will get a different message. There is no biblical Christmas tree, no sign in the bible that Jesus ever celebrated his Birthday at all in fact (and we do know they had birthdays, John the Baptist was beheaded at one, it's just that Jesus' own is conspicuously absent and every time a birthday is mentioned in the bible, it's entirely shown as negative. Almost as if God did not intend us to celebrate it).

Even if the folk traditions of Christmas were pagan in origin, practicing them today would not be pagan worship. For it to be pagan, it would have to be religious. It would have to be directed towards the pagan gods. Nobody today worships the pagan gods like yggdrasil. Nobody puts up a Christmas tree thinking that they are honoring some Norse mythological god. Folk tradition just means a tradition of the people. It does not mean that they are worshipping some pantheistic god. It just means that they brought their folk traditions with them when they became Christians.

If you really want to get technical about it, a Christmas tree is more Christian than yggdrasil. Yggdrasil is an ash tree. A Christmas tree is a cedar tree. What was Christ's temple built out of? The cedars of Lebanon. The poles of the Ark were made of cedar. The use of cedar is very specifically mentioned in the Bible.
Lolwut?

Exodus 25:12,13
12 And thou shalt cast four rings of gold for it, and put them in the four feet thereof; and two rings shall be on the one side of it, and two rings on the other side of it. 13 And thou shalt make staves of acacia wood, and overlay them with gold. 14 And thou shalt put the staves into the rings on the sides of the ark, wherewith to bear the ark.

As for the Temple, it's true cedar was used in it but stone, iron, copper, silver, and gold were also specifically mentioned, there's no reason to presume ceremonial value for every construction material. Too, Christmas trees are not traditionally cedar, most are Fir Trees and any conifer can be used.

While one can do as they wish as part of a secular holiday, it is wrong to attempt to associate it with worship of God or Jesus, as God does not accept worship that isn't rooted in Truth.

John 4:24
God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth."
 

S'task

Renegade Philosopher
Administrator
Staff Member
Founder
Nonsense, Sol Invictus was initiated in 274 AD. The earliest known Christmas celebration was 336 AD, far later. Claiming the Sol Invictus celebration came later is blatant revisionist history and complete falsehood. Note that your sources don't remotely support the claims you're making, they're basically going "Well really Christianity started in Genesis 3:15 so wayyyy! older," coupled with "We don't have the actual records, only copies of them dating all the way back to 274, so the oldest known intact calendar is later." Incredibly weak and deceptive arguments, as expected of those trying to support untruth.
No, what my sources point out that while yes Sol Invitus was mentioned in 274 AD, at the same time: "But there is no record of this festival being held on December 25th. "The traditional feast days of Sol, as recorded in the early imperial fasti, were August 8th and/or August 9th, possibly August 28th, and December 11th."(Hijmans, p. 588 )"

The first reference to anything looking like Sol Invitus around Dec 25th doesn't appear until 354, which as you yourself note is AFTER Christmas became associated with that date (in fact, the same calendar used to place a Sol Invictus feast on Dec 25th likewise explicitly mentions Christmas being on Dec 25th). Further Dec 25th was first associated with Christ's birth by Hippolytus, who lived in the early 3rd century not necessarily as a feast day though, and wrote earlier than the earliest dates we have for Sol Invictus.
 

Buba

A total creep
Christmas = winter solstice
Easter = spring equinox (roughly)
St.John's Birthday = summer solstice
Michealmas/Dożynki = autumn equinox (roughly)
Nothing to see here, move along, move along ...
 

S'task

Renegade Philosopher
Administrator
Staff Member
Founder
Christmas = winter solstice
Easter = spring equinox (roughly)
St.John's Birthday = summer solstice
Michealmas/Dożynki = autumn equinox (roughly)
Nothing to see here, move along, move along ...
. . . Firstly, two of those four are really not common celebrated.

Secondly, Easter? Seriously? Nobody except really crazy folks even begin to contest the date of Easter being of purely Christian origin. The date of Easter was, as anyone with a BASIC knowledge of Christianity knows, the day on which Christ resurrected from the Dead, three days after he was buried, which happened on the Friday of the Passover Feast Week. Passover is a specifically Jewish Holiday which has its origins not as anything to do with the Equinox, but rather the Exodus from Egypt and more specifically the final of the Plagues against Egypt where God took all the Firstborn of Egypt save for those who's doors were marked with the Blood of a freshly sacrificed lamb which caused the Angel of Death to pass over that house (hence the name: "Passover").

This is all very important symbolism and foreshadowing to Christianity, as Christ was sacrificed so that God's judgement could similarly pass over those who accept Christ.

But regardless, Easter is ENTIRELY linked to the Jewish Passover feast and it's timing was based on the timing of Passover for many decades, at least until the early Church fathers got tired of having to track the Jewish calendar AND the Roman calendar and coordinating between them which was a PAIN IN THE ASS as the traditional Jewish calendar was a LUNAR calendar while the Roman calendar is a SOLAR calendar and thus have different lengths of years, different months, different leap years, etc. and so settled on a rough formula of "the first Sunday after the full Moon that occurs on or after the spring equinox. If the full Moon falls on a Sunday then Easter is the next Sunday." This generally got Easter quite close to the Passover feast without having to keep track of those things, and the Jewish calendar being a Lunar calendar is why the phase of the moon is important in determining when Easter occurs.

Note: it really does work. This year Passover is April 5 - 13th while Easter is April 9th. In 2022 Passover was April 15 - 23rd* and Easter was April 17th. But the formula isn't perfect, in 2024 they're disconnected with Passover happening April 22 - 30th, while Easter is MARCH 31st! But the next year they're back to synching up again.

This is stupidly well recorded and seriously, while there MAY be a case for some of the more secular Easter traditions being of pagan origins (but even then that's disputed), the DATE is well recorded to have been derived from Passover.

------
* Note the WILD change year to year! This is how much variance there can be between a Lunar calendar and a Solar one!
 

Buba

A total creep
Mental shorthand - Passover is a spring/spring equinox festival, regardless of officially being a celebration of the murder of all non-Jewish firstborn. Hence so is Easter, indirectly, by association.
 

S'task

Renegade Philosopher
Administrator
Staff Member
Founder
Mental shorthand - Passover is a spring/spring equinox festival, regardless of officially being a celebration of the murder of all non-Jewish firstborn. Hence so is Easter, indirectly, by association.
Repeating bullshit doesn't make it true. That it happens at the time of year is purely coincidental. Had Passover happened at some other point in the year, Easter would be then. Fundamentally neither holiday is linked to the Equinox and constantly repeating that they are doesn't make it so.
 

ATP

Well-known member
Mental shorthand - Passover is a spring/spring equinox festival, regardless of officially being a celebration of the murder of all non-Jewish firstborn. Hence so is Easter, indirectly, by association.
If we follow that logic,Jahve is Baal,and Holy Mary - Astarte/Baal waifu/
Since i read it in books of dude who claim,that good aliens from Pleiads would come and save us from BAD AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE and BAD HOLY MARY ,i suggest that you should not follow that road.

And yes,for him chrystianity is noot-so-well masked pagan cults.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top