Why do Christians hate Jesus? They're ignoring his birthday again!

[Ian David]

This year, Jesus' birthday falls on October 7th-- yet I have heard absolutely zero so-called Christians calling for celebrating the occasion this year.

Jesus was born on the first day of The Feast of Tabernacles-- also known as the Jewish holiday of Sukkot. That's the 15th day of the month of Tishri. This year, that's October 7th.

Although some Fundamentalists believe he was born on the 1st of Tishri, most scholars believe it was the 15th.

On October 7th, be sure to ask your Christian friends why they're ignoring Jesus' birthday, and ask them why they hate Christmas.

See:

When Was Jesus Born?
JESUS' REAL BIRTHDAY. Most biblical scholars and preachers readily admit that they know Christ was not born on December 25th. However, they claim that this ...
http://www.aristotle.net/~bhuie/birthday.htm

Also:


Jesus - His real Birthday
Setting dates sensitive to Christian belief and faith based on astronomical data might stir opposition. At the same time, using these methods to unlock the ...
http://www.firmament.com/2000years/

The real birth date of Jesus Christ
The real birth date of Jesus Christ is revealed in Revelation 12:1-5. ... Hence, in Biblical terminology, Jesus was born on the first of Tishri, ...
http://777-health.spiritworld.info/thebirthofjesus.htm

When Was Jesus Born?
To be exact, He was born on approximately Tishri 15, which this year is the ... to simply say that Yeshua's (Jesus) birthday is approximately the first day ...
http://www.thetribulationforce.com/when_was_jesus_born.htm

Happy Birthday Jesus-Succoth
Tishri 15,the first day of Sukkot,marks the Birth of Yeshua Jesus during the Feast of Tabernacles, or Ingathering (Booths).Happy Birthday Jesus.
http://www.cybertime.net/~ajgood/HBJ.htm

[havocmom]

1. Got raincoat?

Exploding heads get messy. ;)

Thanks for the post. Even as a wee child, I saw through Dec 25. It made no sense what so ever. Agrarian people paying taxes months after the harvest? Rulers would not allow THAT to happen.

[papau]

2. Revelation shouldn't be in Bible - Jesus birthdate appears to be in April

Web report of research in 1996:


THE PLACE:
Mary and Josef returned to Bethlehem because of a census ordered by Augustus and carried out by Quirinius, governor (Legat) of Syria. Quirinius was "Legat" of Syria in 6 AD. Many bible historians hold the opinion he was in office 13 years earlier and newer research found there was a census ordered by Rome in 12 BC, which was concluded after 8 or 7 BC. Orders took time, Syria was at the edge of the Roman Empire.



THE YEAR:
Jesus was born during the reign of King Herod. Herod died in 4 BC. Mary and Josef fled with Jesus to Egypt. In those days no weekend trip and it is to assume they stayed one winter before they heard of Herod's death and returned to Nazareth.



THE MONTH:
Luke 2,8: "That night some shepherds were in the fields outside the village guarding their flocks of sheep"... During winter nights sheep were normally held in stables. They were only left in the fields during warmer spring or summer nights.



THE DAY AND THE TIME:
Matthew calls them "Magi", the wise men (or astrologers in the Living Bible) who came from the East (Persia) to follow the star in the West. "Magi" saw themselves as followers of the Persian prophet Zoroaster, who combined astrology with his religious teachings. Ancient astrology was greatly respected as a tool of the time. Roman emperors, Greek philosophers and scientists or the simple Jewish farmer, who trusted the stars to know when to put seed in the ground, all were convinced of the effectiveness of astronomical/astrological observations, sampled over generations. The early evening and twilight hours were very important, people were still awake. In lieu of calendar and wrist watch, everybody "watched" the sky, and if it was just for a simple reason, a new-moon started a new Jewish month.


PHYSICAL EVIDENCE

Ever since astrology is based foremost on the positions of sun, moon and planets in reference to a given place and time, a Comet or a Super Nova should be ruled out. Phenomena of this kind are normally registered. Roman astronomers/astrologers of those days left us a large number of documents, nothing extraordinary could be found.

The presumption not a short single occurrence, but a sequence of stellar events over several months guided the "Magi" towards the West, set the stage. The search concentrated on a Conjunction of Venus and the crescent Moon in the early evening sky, undoubtedly the most impressive show of all. Never during the years, time and place in question (Bethlehem) could an angular separation between them of less than 1° be found in three consecutive months, except in 5 BC.

Surprisingly and even more impressive, Saturn appears close to both Venus and the crescent Moon on February 10, to be replaced the next "new-month" by a close Jupiter on March 11, 5 BC. To find Jupiter's moons in a position of a cross, can inspire someone's imagination further. The satellite positions agree with those in the Astronomical Almanac to typically about 2 arc- seconds. However, current orbital data is not sufficiently reliable for moon positions to be trusted over greatly extended periods of time.

But nothing seems to be close to the spectacle of the following "new-month" on April 10, 5 BC, when Bethlehem's evening sky presents Venus and the 3 day old crescent Moon about 1° apart. One can imagine misreading the crescent Moon as a tail of a comet. The Christmas card did not lie.

[Ian David]

3. Link? In any case, the case for Tishri is better. n/t

[papau]

16. All your web links use a "likely" interpretation of Luke 1:26-55 or Revel

Not that great a case for Tishri - at least in my opinion :-)

http://www.aristotle.net/~bhuie/birthday.htm

There is nothing here except a game where we start with a major assumption - "The Holy Spirit likely overshadowed Mary very soon after her encounter with the angel Gabriel."

OK - "likely" and "very soon" are based on what factoid?


http://www.firmament.com/2000years/

Interesting - this one says APRIL - and as Friedhelm Dohmann notes in his 2003 comment, his November 1996 proof was accepted by most folks by 2002.

http://777-health.spiritworld.info/thebirthofjesus.htm

Victor Paul Wierwille's book called "Jesus Christ - Our Promised Seed" is claimed as the source - but as always she jumps into Revelation 12:1-5 - and Revelation should not be part of the Bible IMHO - as I have said many times - although I found interesting her "obvious" "Zodiac" proof. Then we toss in her interpretation of words as numbers and then her interpretation of the nunbers - the DaVinci Code joke of a book was more credible.

http://www.thetribulationforce.com/

This is an interesting anti-evolution site - with good music as you open new pages (your link does not work but going to the main page will work). And he has a few new thought such as Daniel's time to Jesus thought(9:25) and the date Nehemiah came to Jerusalem. But in the end he comes back to it is likely that Mary was with child shortly afyer the angel came to her. And Sukkot pilgrims used up all the rooms in the inn - no census explanation allowed. And "good news of great joy that will be for all the people" refers to Sukkot because Jews positively encouraged non Jews to participate in the festibal. And Hanukkah, the Festival of Lights, ties to Jesus being called the light of the world (John 8:12, 9:5, 12:46). And shepherds being out with their flocks by night means lambs had no problem with the weather - so Dec/Jan are out. Then what every one translates as "Now in those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus, that a census be taken of all the inhabited earth" is by the fellow converted to a tax collect degree and we always tax farmers at harvest time (we actually have the census decrees so this one was my favorite). Somehow his backtracking death in the spring by 3.5 years gives us a fall birth - I missed the Bible verse that suggested this method.

http://www.cybertime.net/~ajgood/HBJ.htm

Recently Messianic Jews began to recognize Yeshua-Jesus birthday during Sukkot - OK - no problem. But in the end it comes back to that Angel and the speed at which the fellow worked ....Luke 1:26-55

[Ian David]

17. The main problem is that the bible is a self-contradictory document...

and not meant to be taken either literally or seriously.

If I'd written the bible for my High School independent study course in writing, my teacher would have given me a "D".

[papau]

18. I think the Bible is to be taken seriously - and "almost" literally as we

are finding out via various science studies that reveal very plausible ways things like the parting of the Red Sea were done by God - followed by archaeologist finding link the tracks of carts on the bottom of the Red Sea (the key turned out to be the translation "red" should have been "reed" - a shallow portion of the Red Sea that was empty for a short while - as we now know from the physics - when the island of Santorini blew up).

An "exact" literal translation has the problem noted above (a word for Red Sea that also means "reed" is not caught for a couple of thousand years) plus the original thought is recorded via the mind of a very human, with their own bias, writer. I do not understand the need to take literally - and I do not take as literally as some - the Bible, but I also do not say it was "made up" or that events recorded never happened, or that the religious thoughts, miracles, and moral teachings are not to be taken seriously/

When I was boy genius I thought all would be explained by science (although I,as now. believed in God). When I got to college and found out that little could be really explained I was in shock! We at best could suggest a current guess at "how" - and never a real answer for "why" - and even the "how guesses" was not available for most things. Near 50 years later I admire the hard work done by those in science to move the bar forward, and marvel at the results, while noting that every time the bar is moved we find how much more we do not know, and indeed there are some areas that we will never know because science does not have any way to develop answers to some of these new - and old, very old - questions.

Jesus was a Jew, but there is no need to associate the events of his life with the symbols of that religion/tradition such as Sukkot, as what he taught about God stands on its own. So I take with a grain of salt "revelations" based on "new logical" interpretations of what is written that claim to find the "real" facts.

I take the Bible very seriously and rather literally - and I do not think that is either wrong to do, or a bad thing to do. I see no reason not take it "literally" - except I do not force fundi interpretations into my understanding of God just because someone sames they have the correct literal interpretation.

[Goblinmonger]

19. Don't use the biblical definition of Pi, though

you'll get all your test answers wrong.

[Ian David]

20. And a bat isn't really a kind of bird, either. n/t

[Goblinmonger]

22. And rabbits don't chew their own cud n/t

[papau]

25. And do not try to milk a rabbit either :-)

There are Many reasons to not take the Bible's word on how things work based on forces and fields and evolution - if you want a good grade take the ideas of science instead. But then the Bible is not a how things work book beyond saying God makes them work that way (if you like it better - God makes the laws that make them work that way - and throw in how "free will" is a lot like the concept of Quantum :-) )

And it is rather interesting how close to big bang the Bible's creation story is.

Let there be light = big bang?

:-)

[papau]

24. Depends on your definition of "bird" doesn't ? :-)

:-)

[papau]

23. for extra points: Which state tried to pass the PI=3 law?

:-)

[Ian David]

21. My 4 year-old daughter who asks a whole lot of "why" and "how" questions

Sometimes, I have to simplify my explanations to a level which she can understand.

If "god" actually dictated "the" bible to man, I assume that the invisible man in the sky would have similarly simplified his explanations.

If I jumped into a time machine and had to explain creation to a bunch of desert nomads who couldn't figure out how to cook pork, let alone keep their penises clean without surgery, I imagine I might simplify some things-- or even just make stupid shit up to keep their primitive minds from exploding.

I imagine a Deity might have to treat primitives the same way Captain Kirk might, while trying not to violate The Prime Directive. Speaking of Kirk... yeah, even Jehovah isn't above banging a carpenter's daughter if he can get away with it.

If you went back 3,000 years in a time machine, how do you think people would respond to the idea of sharing a common ancestor with monkeys?

And then there's the fact that folks like Pope Gregory and King James went and did their own hatchet jobs and purely self-serving, mortal revisions on what may or may not have been the word of either gawd or the flying spaghetti monster.

But, I'm getting off the subject.

I'm really not interested in a debate over whether or not the bible is the word of god or Zeus of The Flying Spaghetti Monster, any more than I am in debating whether Harry Potter is a real person.

My point is that there is a good case--internally consistent within "the" bible-- to declare 15th of Tishri to be Jesus' birthday. It may not be an iron-clad case, but when you're talking about "the" bible, what really is certain?

If Jesus really cares about us celebrating his birthday, then there is ample evidence to suggest that most christians might be on his shit list.

Again, if I were a christian who believed that Jesus died for my sins and loves me unconditionally-- and I will burn in Hell if I piss him off-- then I'd be concerned about this.

Then again, most (though, to their credit, not all) fundamentalists seem to be concerned about everything except global warming.

There is enough "evidence" in "the" bible to warrant christians being concerned that they might be pissing-off Jesus by missing his birthday. Not that there aren't so many other reasons for Jesus to be pissed at most christians.

If I were a christian, I'd send Jesus a card with and some organic fair-trade frankincense RIGHT NOW.

[dipsydoodle]

4. I thought

"Christmas" was used as a convienent date of birth because it tied up with a pagan festival ?

[Ian David]

5. That's exactly right.

Jesus' birthday was hijacked by tree-worshiping Pagans.

[dipsydoodle]

8. The pagan festival was just after

the winter solstice by which time they knew the sun hadn't bailed out on them. They've only recently figured that perceptions of Stone Henge may have been wrong all these years. It was layed out to display the winter solstice - not the summer one which gets celebrated nowadays by all and sundry down on Salisbury Plain and is coincidental.

I think it got moved a few days forward to the 25th to coincide wih early closing day at the shops when it all started thousands of years ago. :)

[I_Will]

9. I think you have it backwards, IanDB1...

The pre-existing pagan holiday was hijacked by the Christian Romans to facilitate assimilation of those groups into the empire.

Or so I think.

[Ian David]

11. You're correct. I did, in fact, have it backward.

"But if we become Christian, we won't be able to have our Winter Solstice celebrations!"

"Yes, that's right."

"But they let the Jews keep their Pagan Harvest Celebration by saying it was about an Exodus from Egypt which never even happened."

"Oh, okay... you can have your Winter Solstice and your trees and misteltoe... we'll just say it's for Jesus."

"Thank you! We'll become Christians, then. Now, about this fertility ritual we do involving a giant bunny hiding eggs in the bushes..."

[RaleighNCDUer]

10. Yup. It was tied in with both Saturnalia and the worship of

Mithra, who was the big challanger from the East in the days of early Christianity - very popular with the Roman military.

[hippiechick]

6. Jesus' birthday is when Wal-Mart says it is!

Just look at the pre-pre-Christmas Sale Flyer in your Sunday paper, you heretic!! ;)

:silly:

[William769]

7. Well at least your admitting Jesus exists.

Thats a start!

[Ian David]

12. In order to make my thesis internally consistent...

... I have to take as a given that a Historical Jesus existed.

While I don't personally believe that Jesus is the Messiah or that he rose from the dead, I am undecided as to whether or not he ever lived at all.

But phrasing my original post in terms of "If-Jesus-Really-Lived-His-Birthday-Would-Have-Been..." steals my own thunder.

I wouldn't write a book report on Harry Potter's latent Oedipal complex, while prefacing every paragraph with a disclaimer that Harry Potter is a fictional character.

So, why should I speculate about Jesus' birthday while prefacing every thought with a disclaimer that Jesus may be a fictional character, when that isn't central to my thesis?

But if Jesus did exist, then he was born between the 1st and 15th of Tislav-- most likely the 15th.

[Igel]

13. That's more or less what the church I was in believed.

We didn't do Xmas.

Then again, we also weren't sure when in the fall he would have been born. Around Sukkoth, to be sure--one of the times when every family (originally every male) had to give a sacrifice. But no specific date.

And, another 'then again': We didn't observe birthdays, whether our own or Jesus'.

But we did keep Sukkoth, aka Feast of Tabernacles. :-)

BTW, the springtime-birth hypothesis doesn't address a simple question: When did the shepherds *stop* guarding their sheep in the pastures at night? Simple answer: they used the same criterion that they used in the winter, spring, and summer--if it's warm enough, stay out; if it's too cold, bring them back. The usual rule involved with humescence. It's still warm enough to stay out overnight at Sukkoth, most years.

BTW, Sukkoth is coming right on up. My former church starts its celebration tomorrow (Friday) night at sundown.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

14. So did you get me a present?

[Ian David]

15. I bought you an Etrog and a Lulav.

(Little Jewish Boy sold seperately. Not available for sale in Oklahoma).

Happy Jesus' BirthDay!
http://www.mazornet.com/jewishcl/Holidays/sukkot-lulav.htm