Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadJohn Kitto Evening Bible Devotions: July 22
Today is: Thursday, April 18th, 2024 (Show Today's Devotion)
Select a Day for a Devotion in the Month of July: (Show All Months)
Luk_2:11
Yet, in fact, the time of the year in which Jesus was born is quite as uncertain as that of the year of his birth; perhaps it is more uncertain—as the notes of time in the sacred narrative are fewer and less distinct. The question is one of little importance, even for those who observe the day, as the celebration of a public event is not necessarily confined to the day of the year on which it occurred. The formal celebration of the birth-day of our own sovereign is, with a view to public convenience, often appointed for another day and month than that on which it actually occurred. The question is, however, one of some Biblical interest, if only from the natural wish to know, whether the various circumstances attending and following our Lord’s birth did or did not take place in the depth of winter.
It is clear, that a celebration of the day of Christ’s nativity was not thought of in the earliest ages of the Christian church; when it was at length considered proper, no clue or tradition existed as to the real time, which had to be determined with reference to probabilities, of which we are as competent to judge as the founders of the festival were, and perhaps more competent, from the more severely critical tendencies of our age.
We strongly think that there is no satisfactory evidence as to the time of the year, and still less as to the precise day; and it appears to us that the season, and, consequently, the day, have been determined on erroneous and uncritical data. There is no one now who will stand up for either the season or the day. Neither have even ancient tradition or practice in their favor. It would seem that the earliest writer who alludes to the matter was Clement of Alexandria, who wrote about the middle of the third century, and speaks with compassionate scorn of the attempts made by persons in his time to fix, not only the precise year, but the exact day, of Christ’s birth, both of which he considered equally futile and impracticable. As there could have been no object in fixing the day of our Lord’s birth but for the purpose of making the anniversary day a festival, this may be regarded as the first indication of a tendency in this direction, and we know from other sources that it was not until about this time that there was any celebration of the nativity of Christ in the Western church; and it is well known that there was nothing of the kind in the Eastern churches till towards the end of the fourth century. These churches had but one festival bearing any reference to the appearance of Christ—and that was the feast of the Epiphany, then regarded (for it has since acquired another meaning) as celebrating the commencement of our Lord’s ministry by his baptism by John in the Jordan. When the Christmas festival, as the anniversary of our Lord’s birth, came to them from the West, they at first resisted it strenuously; but at length they accepted the anniversary, but not the day, choosing rather to connect it, properly enough, with their own old festival of the Manifestation—and, therefore, celebrating the Lord’s nativity on the 6th of January, instead of the 25th of December.
Thus we see there is, in fact, no authority of tradition for the time of the year or the day of the year. How it came to be fixed to the 25th of December, seems to have happened thus—It was thought, most erroneously, that Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, was high-priest, and that, when the angel appeared to him in the temple, it was on the day of atonement, on which day only the high-priest went into the inner sanctuary, to make expiation for the sins of the people, by sprinkling the blood of atonement before and upon the ark. A greater error was never made; as it is clear that Zacharias was an ordinary priest, who, in the due course of service, went into the outer sanctuary to offer the daily incense. But the mistake being made, the reasoning went on thus—The day of atonement being in September, John would be born in June; but John was six months older than Jesus, who, therefore, must have been born in December. This we firmly believe to be the basis, so worthless and unsubstantial, on which the determination of our Lord’s birth to December has been raised.
As little satisfactory is the process suggested by Sir Isaac Newton, as having been the one probably followed by those who first began to celebrate this and other festivals. He supposes that they designedly distributed to the cardinal points of the year—the annunciation of the Virgin Mary, the feasts of St. Michael and of John the Baptist, with this of the birth of our Savior, being at first appointed to the days which they still occupy in the calendar, as being at that time respectively the days of the vernal and autumnal equinoxes, and of the summer and winter solstices.
As, therefore, it is admitted on all hands, that the real day of the nativity is beyond the reach of calculation, it is open to us to acknowledge, that all the circumstances seem to us unfavorable to its having been in winter. It was little likely that the Romans would heighten the unpopularity of an intrinsically unpopular measure by constraining a large part of the population to travel at that time of the year. Still less is it likely that Mary, in her delicate condition, would have accompanied her husband in the inclement weather belonging to that season. The same objection arises still more strongly from this being the season for the journey to Egypt—for there was then a new-born infant, the distance was far greater, and the season still less favorable—for if the birth was at the close of December, this journey must have been in February. The fact, that the shepherds were abroad with their flocks at night in the open air, is also against that supposition. The cold of the night during winter is too severe in Palestine to make this practicable. It is true, that the sheep might remain in the open air at night, as they do in much severer climates. But then they were folded in pens or totes near the homestead, and had no need of night watchers; for it is only when feeding at large in the open pastures during the milder seasons, that there is need of this night attendance of shepherds; for it requires to be well noticed, that there appears to have been several shepherds in charge of the flock, which alone seems to indicate what was not the time of the year. What it was it is more difficult to say. Those who dissent from the existing conclusion usually name some time about either the vernal or autumnal equinox. We should be inclined to prefer the latter— somewhere about the feast of tabernacles. The comparative leisure which the conclusion of the labors of the agricultural year afforded to a large part of the population, rendered this a favorite season for journeying and visiting among the Jews, and was therefore more likely than any other to be selected for the registration of the people—which could not well have been made at any other time without causing some of the useful and important labors of the field to be interrupted—a result which must have appeared quite as little desirable to the Romans as to the Jews themselves.
Upon the whole, we are clearly of opinion, that December is one of the three least likely months of the twelve in which the birth of our Saviour could be fixed; and that, in the absence of any adequate materials for a definite conclusion, the month of September may be indicated as affording some probabilities which can scarcely be advanced in favor of any other.