|
Home
Store
The Internet Library. Alternative encyclopedia, dictionary, and
wikipedia distillation.
CHAPTER VIII.
THE TWENTY-FIFTH OF DECEMBER THE BIRTHDAY OF THE GODS.
DIVESTED of all explanation, the announcement of the fact that the time
of the birth of many of the incarnated Gods and Saviors of antiquity was
fixed at the same period, and this period the twenty-fifth of December,
celebrated all over Christendom as the birthday of Jesus Christ, would
sound marvelously strange, especially when it is noticed that this
period formerly dated the birth of a new year—the birth of King Sol. And
when we find that the ancient pagans were in the habit of celebrating
this venerated twenty-fifth of December as the birthday of their Gods in
the same manner Christians now celebrate it as the birthday of Christ,
we are driven to admit that something more than mere fortuitous accident
must be adduced to account for the coincidence.
According to Dr. Lightfoot, the temple of Jerusalem was employed in
celebrating the birthday of a pagan God (Adonis) on the very night
Christians assign for the birth of Christ. And Robert Taylor informs us
that nearly all the nations of the East were once in the habit of rising
at midnight to celebrate the birthday of their Gods, on the twenty-fifth
of December. And to this statement Mr. Higgins adds that, "At the first
moment after midnight of the twenty-fourth of December, the ancient
nations celebrated the accouchement of the queen of heaven and celestial
p. 69
virgin, and the birth of the God Sol, the Infant Savior, and the God of
Day.
Bacchus of Egypt, Bacchus of Greece, Adonis of Greece, Chrishna of
India, Chang-ti of China, Chris of Chaldea, Mithra of Persia, Sakia of
India, Jao Wapaul (a crucified Savior of ancient Britain), were all born
on the twenty-fifth of December, according to their respective
histories. Chrishna is represented to have been born at midnight on the
twenty-fifth of the month Savarana, which answers to our December, and
millions of his disciples celebrated his birthday by decorating their
houses with garlands and gilt paper, and the bestowment of presents to
friends. The Rev. Mr. Barret tells us, "It was once common for the women
in Rome to perambulate the streets on the twenty-fifth of December,
singing in a loud voice, "Unto us a child is born this day."
The twenty-fifth of December, then, it will be observed, was marked as
the birthday of the incarnated Gods, Saviors, and Sons of God, of many
of the religious systems of antiquity, long prior to the birth of
Christ.
And why his birth was fixed at that date is not hard to account for.
According to the celebrated Christian writer Mr. Goodrich, the Christian
world had no chronology and recorded no dates for several centuries
after the commencement of the Christian era. (See History of all
Nations, p. 23.) No event of their history was marked by dates for
nearly four hundred years. Hence, the time of Christ's birth is
altogether a matter of conjecture, as is also every other event noticed
in the Christian bible. This is proved by the fact that the ablest
Christian writers and chronologists differ to the extent of thirty-five
hundred years in fixing the time of every event in the bible. A Mr.
Kennedy presents us with three hundred different chronological systems,
by different Christian writers, all founded on the bible, and proving
that the date of its various events are
p. 70
inextricably involved in a labyrinth of doubt, darkness and uncertainty.
Relative to the time of Christ's birth, the "Encyclopedia Britannica"
says: "Christians count one hundred and thirty-three contrary opinions
of different authors concerning the year the Messiah appeared on
earth—many of them celebrated writers." (Art. Chron.) Mark the
declaration—one hundred and thirty-three different opinions as to the
year Christ was born in; one hundred and thirty-three different years
fixed on by different Christian chronologists as the time of the birth
of the most extraordinary and most noted being, as Christians would have
us believe, that ever appeared on earth. Think of an omnipotent God
descending from heaven, performing astounding miracles, and presenting
other proofs of being a God, and yet not one of the three hundred
writers of that era take any notice of him, or make any note of his
birth or any event of his life. This circumstance is of itself
sufficient to banish and dissipate all faith in his divinity.
It is evident, from the facts just presented, that all systems of
Christian chronology are founded on mere conjecture, and hence should be
rejected as worthless. What event of Christ's life, then, can be
accepted as certain, when no record was made of it till the time was
forgotten, and none for at least half a century after the dawn of the
Christian era, according to Dr. Lardner, when nearly all who witnessed
it must have been dead?
We think the most reasonable conclusion in the case is, that Christ,
instead of performing those Munchausen prodigies attributed to him—such
as casting out devils, raising the dead, controlling the elements of
nature, etc.—led such an ordinary, obscure life—excelling only in
healing the sick and other noble deeds of charity and philanthropy—that
he attracted but little notice by the higher classes, or by anybody but
those of a similar turn of mind, till he was
p. 71
deified by Constantine, in the year 325 A.D. Hence, the time of his
birth was not recorded, and was forgotten. Consequently, the
twenty-fifth of December was selected as his birthday, because it was
the birthday of other Gods, and because it was regarded by the heathen,
from time immemorial, as the birthday of Sol, the glorious luminary of
heaven, it being the period he is born again into a new year, and
"commences again his journey and his life;" and because, also, this
epoch was, as Sharon Turner informs us, in his "History of the
Anglo-Saxons," the commencement of a new year up to the tenth century.
These events signalized the twenty-fifth of December, and made it a
period of sufficient importance to lead the early Christians to suppose
it must have been the birthday of their Messiah. Mosheim, however,
confesses that the day or the year in which it happened "has not been
fixed with certainty, notwithstanding the profound researches of the
learned." So that it is still an open question as to when Christ was
born. What day of the month, what year, or what century it took place
in, is still unknown. This circumstance is, as before suggested,
sufficient of itself to utterly prostrate all faith in the divine claims
for Jesus Christ. What would be thought of a witness who should testify
in court to the truth of an occurrence of which he did not know the
year, or even the century, in which it took place, or who could come no
nearer than one hundred and thirty-three years in fixing or guessing at
the time. Would the court accept such testimony?
from Crucified Saviors
|