Resources on Defending Christmas

Does Christmas need defending?

The intention of this page is to be a resource for Christians to counter arguments against Christmas. While Christmas does not necessarily need defending, I wanted to give resources to help people dialogue about this topic. I hope this information helps you.

In defense

By Matt Garcia

Most Christians have no problem celebrating Christmas because of the rich traditions and religious history behind this holiday. However, each year in December, misinformation is spread about Christmas by those who claim that this holiday has pagan origins. On this page, I would like to share resources that give thought-provoking answers and rebuttals to these arguments.
 
The goal here isn’t to get everyone to celebrate Christmas. After all, it’s never commanded to be observed in the Bible and is in fact a man-made, church holiday. If you choose not to celebrate it or participate, then no judgement should be cast. However, when false claims are made about the observation of Christmas, it is important to look at the arguments from accurate scholarly sources, the scriptures, and logical reasoning. I hope that these resources help you cherish the rich history and tradition of Christmas.
Q

setting the stage

There are many anti-Christmas arguments that are not all created equal. Because of this, we have to approach each argument with a different lens. Here are three different ways to counter these arguments: 

Some arguments can be refuted by correctly exegeting a false initial interpretation of scripture. There are a few Bible passages that seem to prohibit the celebration of Christmas. However, a close examination of the context of each scripture in question is key.

Some arguments can be refuted by a factual or historical source that counters their source. As I will explain, there are relevant sources that will help us determine the origins of Christmas traditions.

Some arguments can be refuted by logic or reevaluating their ideology or philosophy. There are foundational ideologies that the anti-Christmas crowd have that need reevaluation. By understanding the genetic fallacy or the cherry-picking fallacy, we can begin to break down the claims.

Scripture

Below are common scriptures that are used to condemn Christmas traditions. Let’s look at each claim one by one.

"Jeremiah 10:2-4 condemns Christmas trees"

Jeremiah 10 is NOT talking about Christmas trees. Some people have tried to argue that the Bible condemns Christmas trees. They often cite Jeremiah 10:2-4. Here are three reasons why that won’t work.

First, the context is clearly referring to idols, not Christmas trees. When you read the entire chapter, it becomes clear Jeremiah is contrasting idols made by craftsman (v. 3, 9, 14) and God who made everything (v. 12, 16).

Second, the description fits an idol, not a Christmas tree. After the tree is cut down, it is “worked with an axe by the hands of a craftsman” (v. 3). Notice the wood is being carved into something. Later in verses 8, Jeremiah specifically calls them idols, “They are both stupid and foolish; the instruction of idols is but wood!” In verse 5, the idol is compared to a scarecrow, which has a mouth and legs but cannot talk or walk. Again, this fits a description of an idol, not a Christmas tree.

Third, reading a Christmas tree into Jeremiah 10 is anachronistic. An anachronism is attributing a custom, event, or object into a time period where it doesn’t belong. There is no evidence that Christmas trees date back to a pagan ritual. So reading Christmas trees into Jeremiah 10 won’t work.

"Deuteronomy 18 says to not worship like the pagans"

“When you come into the land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominable practices of those nations.” -Deuteronomy 18:9 (ESV) [emphasis mine]

This passage is often referred to from the anti-Christmas camp. However, it is very important not to apply scripture to where it does not need to be applied.

Here’s the context: God was giving the ancient Israelites laws for how to live out their lives as worship unto Him. God lists things like the Levitical priesthood, sacrifices, festivals, and more. One thing he told them was to not follow the abominable practices of the nations around them. The anti-Christmas crowd says, “Look, see! God says not to follow the pagan culture around us. Since Christmas has pagan origins, that means we should not celebrate Christmas! The Bible says so!”

Well, hold on a minute. This is terrible exegesis. If you just keep reading, you will see what the passage is specifically talking about.

“10 There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer 11 or a charmer or a medium or a necromancer or one who inquires of the dead, 12 for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord. And because of these abominations the Lord your God is driving them out before you. 13 You shall be blameless before the Lord your God, 14 for these nations, which you are about to dispossess, listen to fortune-tellers and to diviners. But as for you, the Lord your God has not allowed you to do this.” -Deuteronomy 10-14 (ESV) [emphasis mine]

Oh, that makes sense. God is specifically calling out how the nations around them practice child sacrifice, witchcraft, and divination. These things should not be done. Is there anyone who is sacrificing their children to a pagan god on Christmas morning? Is there a family who gets out a ouija board in front of their Christmas tree as a tradition? Is there someone who attempts to talk to ghosts after they sing “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer?” If these individuals exist, then absolutely, this scripture can apply to them. Christians should not be purposefully engaging in witchcraft. However, this is not the case for virtually every person who celebrate Christmas.

Please, do not use this scripture for an anti-Christmas argument. It will not go well for you.

"Deuteronomy 12 condemns Christmas trees."

“You shall surely destroy all the places where the nations whom you shall dispossess served their gods, on the high mountains and on the hills and under every green tree.” -Deuteronomy 12:2 (ESV) [emphasis mine]

Some believe this passage is referring to a Christmas tree. Again, it’s important to understand the context here.

Just like the passage in Jeremiah 10, this passage is referring to idol worship by the nations around them, not Christmas trees. Reading a Christmas tree into Deuteronomy 12 is anachronistic. 

Now, let’s look at some scriptures that counter the anti-Christmas arguments.

Exiles in Babylon

In the book of Daniel, it tells different stories about four individuals who were exiled Israelites living in a foreign nation under pagan kings. These individuals assimilated into their pagan culture, but stood firm in their faith when they were asked to cross a line they did not want to cross.

First, these four individuals let their leaders change their Hebrew names into Babylonian names:

Daniel in Hebrew means “Yahweh is my judge.” It was changed to Belteshazzar, which means “Bel’s Prince” (another name for Marduk)

Hananiah in Hebrew means “God is gracious.” It was changed to Shadrach, which means “illuminated by Rak” (their sun god)

Mishael in Hebrew means “Who is like Yahweh.” It was changed to Mishach, which means “Who is like Shak (Babylonian version of Venus)

Azariah in Hebrew means “Helped by Yahweh.” it was changed to Abednego, which means “Servant of Nego (their fire god)

Second, they let them change their language. Daniel 1:4 details that the purpose of choosing leaders from Israel was to assimilate them into their Babylonian culture and to abandon their Hebrew culture.

Third, they let them change their clothes, which had significant meaning in ancient cultures. Daniel 3:21 says, “Then these men were bound in their cloaks, their tunics,* their hats, and their other garments, and they were thrown into the burning fiery furnace.” The Septuagint Greek translation (LXX) renders these clothing items to allude to the reader that they are wearing Persian clothes.

These four friends let their leaders assimilate them into pagan culture by changing their language, their names, and their clothing. However, they would not let the king change their kosher diets (Daniel 1:8-21), how they prayed (Daniel 6:10), and how they worshiped (Daniel 3:16-18). They drew the line when they were forced to bow down to idols, and they were willing to die for it.

Summary

How can we translate this to Christmas? Well, we should take these four individuals in the book of Daniel as examples of how to live in the world around us. There may be things we can assimilate into the culture around us in order to spread the gospel share the love of Jesus. Daniel and his friends did not sin by changing their Hebrew names to pagan names, changing their Hebrew language to a pagan language, and changing their Hebrew clothes to pagan clothes. They were able to be elevated to high leadership positions because of this. However, just like these four, we should know where to draw the line. If there is someone who is worshiping their Christmas tree, then take it down. If there is someone who is praying to Santa, then throw him out. But who is doing that? Virtually no one! No one is actually worshiping pagan gods by engaging in Christmas traditions. Unless someone is sacrificing their children on a yule log, then I think we’re going to be ok. Daniel and his friends give us a template to live in the world around us. It is one full of worship of God, character, and wisdom. Let’s follow their example each and every day.

Jesus & The Feast of Dedication

Some argue that because Christmas is a man-made holiday we should not celebrate it. Some believe we should only celebrate the feasts (holidays) that God instituted in Leviticus.

This is true. The Bible never commands us to celebrate Christ’s birth. It was the church that created the holiday of Christmas to celebrate the birth of our Savior. This is man-made holiday.

However, this does not mean that we should not celebrate a man-made holiday. John chapter 10 details how Jesus celebrated Hanukkah, otherwise known as the Feast of Dedication or the Festival of Lights. “At that time the Feast of Dedication took place at Jerusalem. It was winter, and Jesus was walking in the temple, in the colonnade of Solomon.” (John 10:22-23 ESV)

The Feast of Dedication was not a part of the seven Biblical Feasts that were commanded by God for Israel to celebrate. It was a festival created by the Jewish people in 164 BC to commemorate a significant event in their history – the rededication of the temple. God did not appoint this holiday.

However, Jesus did in fact celebrate this man-made holiday – and for good reason! A miracle took place in the Maccabean revolt where the temple was cleansed and a new altar was built to replace a desecrated one. This holiday was celebrated to help keep the story of the Jewish people alive. It marked a significant point in their people’s history.

In the same way, the celebration of Christmas marks a significant event for those who believe that Jesus is the Messiah. The incarnation (God in the flesh) should be remembered and celebrated, even though it was not commanded by God.

Participating with Christ

Do you believe that when an atheist eats bread and drinks wine, they are inadvertently worshipping Jesus? After all, taking communion (receiving the bread and the cup) is an act of worship only among Christians. Of course an atheist does not worship God when he eats bread and drinks wine. That’s ridiculous.

The Apostle Paul actually talks about this concept in 1 Corinthians chapters 8-11. In the same way that non-Christians don’t “participate” (Gk: koinania) in communion by eating bread and drinking wine, Christians don’t “participate” in idol worship when they eat food sacrificed to idols. 

One of Paul’s points in these chapters is to say that if there is someone who is “weak” (someone who’s conscience is defiled by eating meat sacrificed to idols), then they should not do it. If someone knows that there is no ‘participation’ with demons if they do eat the meat, then it’s fine for them. However, we should not eat the meat in front of a Christian brother to whom it is a “stumbling block” out of love for them.

How can we apply this to Christmas?

There might be a fellow brother or sister in Christ who does not celebrate Christmas for whatever reason. In love we should avoid conversations on this topic as it might be a stumbling block for them. We (pro-Christmas Christians) know that we do not ‘participate’ in pagan worship when we celebrate Christmas. But for the sake of remaining one in Christ, we must show love for our anti-Christmas brothers and sisters (no matter how far they are from the truth) by refraining from the topic.

Facts

 Below are common arguments that claim Christmas traditions have pagan origins. Let’s look at each claim one by one and suggest counter claims.

"December 25th Is Not Jesus' Real Birthday"

First of all, we should note that no one really knows when Jesus’ birthdate actually was. December 25th is just as plausible as any other date on the calendar (Harriman). There are many good arguments for a birthdate around Springtime. So why celebrate his birth on December 25th?
 
There was an ancient legend that a prophet would die on the same day that he was conceived (or born). Since the church was already trying to figure out Jesus’ death and resurrection dates, they also concluded Jesus’ birthdate based off of this tradition. “By the year 243, we thus already find at least two compelling examples of Christian scholars trying to calculate the life-dates of Jesus Christ by chronological means.” (Nothaft, 2013)
 
When they calculated His resurrection to be March 25th, they counted forward nine months to get December 25th. While there are many who disagree with this date and reasonings behind the date, this nonetheless, isn’t the point. The point is to understand how the church fathers arrived at this date. “…there is no reason to suppose that 25 March was any different at the time it first entered the discussion as the likely date of Jesus’s conception, possibly as early as 221 CE.” (Nothaft, 2013)
 
It is also valuable to note that the Eastern Church celebrates Christmas in January.
There is one manuscript of Hippolytus of Rome (170 AD-235 AD), that says Christmas was celebrated on December 25th.
Thomas Talley also notes a heretical group, called the Donatist, held to church traditions prior to their split in 311 AD. They did not keep the introduction of later feasts, like the Feast of the Epiphany, but the evidence suggests they did celebrate Christ’s birth on December 25th. This suggests that Christmas was placed on December 25th prior to 311 AD, which makes it seem as though Aurelian was the one who tried to paganize a Christian date.
 
*Sources:
“Is Christmas Too Pagan for Christians?” – Podcast from DesiringGod.org
“Calculating Christmas” – Article by William J. Tighe

"December 25th was first a pagan holiday"

One important thing to note is that early Christians openly rejected all pagan gods. There are numerous writings in which the early church fathers fought against polythiesm and pagan worship, so it would not make sense that these same individuals would want to “take on” pagan festivals and adopt the same traditions.
Nonetheless, here are two famous arguments that say these false gods were celebrated on December 25th.
 
Saturnalia
There is no evidence of this pagan holiday on December 25th on the Roman calendar prior to 354 A.D.
 
“The traditional pagan Roman calendar had left this period as a quiet and mysterious one, and flanked it instead with a festival of preparation and one of completion: the former was the feast of Saturn, the Saturnalia, in the days after 17 December, the latter the New Year feast, the Kalendae, from 1 to 3 January” (Hutton, 2)
 
Saturnalia was on December 17th and lasted one week. It was never on December 25th. There’s no evidence the church replaced Saturnalia with Christmas. If that were the case, they would have changed it to the 17th not the 25th.
 
Sol Invictus
During the time of Constantine and Licinius, Licinius ordered for Sol to be honored annually with incense, candles, and libations on November 18th, the day the statue was consecrated. (Hermann)
 
“In fact, there is no firm evidence that this feast of Sol on December 25th antedates the feast of Christmas at all. The traditional feast days of Sol, as recorded in the early fasti, were August 8, August 9, August 28, and December 11. Of these only August 28 is still mentioned in the Calendar of 354, along with October 19 and October 22, the latter being the most important, judging by the 36 chariot races which it was celebrated. There is direct evidence that in A.D. 274 Aurelian instituted quadrennial agones in honor of Sol, which were held from October 19-22 and culminated in the unprecedented 36 chariot races recorded in the Calendar of 354 for October 22.” (Hijmans)
 
The Chronography of 354 suggests that the pagans moved the sun worship to December 25th to compete with Christmas. Prior to this, sun worship occured in August, late October (Steven Hijmans,2003), or late November (Herman).
 
Another argument is that Emporer Aurelian instituted the pagan festival Sol Invictus (The Birth of the Unconquered Sun) in 274 AD, thus making it seem as though Christians copied the pagans. However, there is evidence that it was actually the other way around.
 
There is one manuscript of Hippolytus of Rome (170 AD-235 AD), that says Christmas was celebrated on December 25th.
 
Thomas Talley also notes a heretical group, called the Donatist, held to church traditions prior to their split in 311 AD. They did not keep the introduction of later feasts, like the Feast of the Epiphany, but the evidence suggests they did celebrate Christ’s birth on December 25th. This suggests that Christmas was placed on December 25th prior to 311 AD.
 
So which one is it? Which came first? Christmas or Sol Invictus? Well, since there is evidence for both sides, it seems as though there is no conclusive evidence for one side or the other whether it was the inauguration of Sol Invticus or the recognition of Christ’s birth on December 25th. Without cherry-picking the data, one must consider the evidence for both.
 
In Summary:

The date of December 25th for Christmas has no strong evidence of a pagan takeover. Early Christians associated it with Jesus’ conception.

 
*Sources:
“The Stations of the Sun” (pp2) by Ronald Hutton
“Is Christmas Too Pagan for Christians?” – Podcast from DesiringGod.org
“Calculating Christmas” – Article by William J. Tighe
Dessau, Hermann. “Inscriptiones Latinae selectae.” Vol. 3, Ps 2.
Saturnalia of Macrobius. Book 1.10.1-23
“The Origins of the Liturgical Year” by Thomas J. Talley

"December 25th birthdate was copied from ancient false gods"

This idea was popularized by the movies “Zeitgeist” and “Religulous.” However, upon further inspection, the sources on these movies are either flat out lies or misinformation. Check out these videos to compare the truth about how Jesus compares to ancient false gods:

"Christmas trees have pagan origins"

Historians are not entirely sure where Christmas trees come from. There are many theories that ultimately have inconclusive evidence. There is no evidence that Christmas trees show up in any pagan celebration.
 
The first depiction of a Christmas tree is from 1576 in Alsace, France where there is a sculpture of one in a private home. The first mention of Christmas trees is in an Alsace ordinance of 1561, which limits the amount and height of Christmas trees. Many cities claim to be the birthplace of the first Christmas tree, but no one can know for sure.
 
Sabastian Brandt in 1494 mentioned bringing pine branches into ones home for New Years, but it doesn’t say anything about Christmas.
 
Some attribute the first Christmas tree to Martin Luther, while others attribute it to St. Boniface. The tale says that the pagans were about to attempt a human sacrifice under a sacred oak tree. Boniface cut it down and when he was not killed by lightening he pointed to the fir tree as a symbol of Christ.
 
Tanya Gulevich highlights a likely origin story of the Christmas tree where they evolved from paradise trees. In the middle ages it was popular throughout Europe to have an Adam and Eve play performed on December 24th because it was their feast day. Naturally, there would need to be a tree. Since most trees would be dead during the winter months, a fir tree was selected and decorated with apples. The apples would have been eaten after the play on Christmas Eve or on Christmas morning. The Paradise Tree simply became associated with Christmas (Gulevich, 167-174).
 
Some argue there are sources of pagan rituals performed by or on an oak or pine tree. However, all because they used these trees does not mean they are associated with Christmas trees, as trees have been symbolically and literally used in different times and cultures around the world.
 
In Sumary
No one knows for sure exactly how the tradition of bringing a pine tree into your home and decorating it during Christmas came from. It was most likely a cultural conglomeration. But all because some people used a fir tree during the winter for pagan rituals does not mean that it was adapted into Christmas trees. Fir trees have been commonly used in many different cultures around the world during colder months because of their ability to keep their green leaves in winter. Associating pagan worship with Christmas trees has no conclusive evidence.
 
*Sources:
“Narrenschiff” by Sebastian Brandt, 1494

"Yule logs have pagan origins"

There are claims that Christmas has origins from the celebration of Yule. However, King Hakan the Good, a king of Norway moved Yule to December 25th to coincide with Christmas. “King Hakan was a confirmed Christian when he arrived in Norway . . . he had it established in the laws that the Yule celebration was to take place at the same time as it is the custom with the Christians…Before that, Yule was celebrated on midwinter night, and for the duration of three nights.” (Sturluson, pp 106)
There is no evidence that Christmas is a Christianized version of Yule. Christians were celebrating Christmas long before they encountered Norse pagans.
Also, the word “Yule” doesn’t necessarily point to the pagan holiday. It has multiple meanings and has even been a last name. “The word in various spellings, means a loosely defined midwinter period (not a single day) in the early languages of most Germanic and Scandanavian countries.” (Simpson & Roud, pp 402)
The first mention of a log burned around Christmas was in Robert Herricks poetry collection of 1648 where it is called a “Christmas log.” It is not called a Yule log until John Aubrey’s work from 1686. Prior to that century, there are no mention of Yule logs and no evidence that they trace back to the holiday of Yule.
“…the antiquity of the word ‘Yule’ cannot prove the custom’s age. (Simpson & Roud, pp 403)
In Summary
Since there are no modern Christmas traditions that are similar to the Yule festival and the fact that Yule can have various different meanings, there is no way to connect these two together.
*Sources:
“Heimskringla: History of the Kings of Norway” by Snorri Sturluson
“A Dictionary of English Folklore” by Jacqueline Simpson and Steve Roud
Robert Herricks Hesperides Poetry Collection, 1648 (No. 784)
“Remaines of Gentilisme and Judaisme” by John Aubrey, 1686-87 (pp 5)

"Mistletoe has pagan origins"

The tradition of kissing under the mistletoe has been associated with Christmas at least as far back as the 18th century where it seems to have begun under the serving class of England. The mistletoe kiss would not have grown so popluar if it wasn’t for John Colbatch’s extensive work on mistletoe in 1719. There was a whole section on superstitions and customs of mistletoe, but no mention of kissing under it. The earliest reference to kissing under the mistletoe comes from a song in 1784 from the musical comedy Two to One. By the 1800s, kissing under the mistletoe became associated with Christmas.
 
In Summary
While there are sources that say pagans used mistletoe in various times of the year, there was no correlation to kissing under it until the 1700s when pagan rituals were long gone. It slowly morphed into a Christmas tradition over time, and no one knows exactly why.
  
*Sources:

"Nativity scenes have pagan origins"

Some have suggested that nativity scenes were Christian attempts to mimick public idols in pagan sacred spaces, but there’s no evidence to support a connection. 
 
The first nativity scene was set up by St. Francis of Assisi in 1223 A.D. and he did not even do it as a Christmas tradition, but his followers promoted the custom and it became associated with Christmas shortly after. (St. Bonaventure, Ch 10.7)
  
This has nothing to do with paganism, but more to do with reminding us about the reason for the season, and that is the glory of the incarnation.
*Sources:
“Life of St. Francis of Assisi” by St. Bonaventure

"Gift-giving has pagan origins"

The giving of gifts has been an accepted Christmas tradition today. But this custom was not always associated with Christmas. It can be traced back to the 1840s where it replaced an older custom of exchanging gifts with adults on New Years Day. Children were given gifts on December 6th, the feast day of St. Nicholas (who is the patron saint of children). St. Nicolas customs were also moved to December 25th in an effort to make Christmas more family oriented. (Simpson & Roud)
This custom has been accused of dating back to pagan traditions, but there is no evidence to support this theory. Gift-giving is human custom that expands across all cultures and traditions. If we can’t exchange gifts on Christmas because the pagans once did that, then that means we can’t have family meals together because that’s also what the pagans did. This argument is probably the worst arugment on this list.
  
*Sources:
“A Dictionary of English Folklore” by Jacqueline Simpson and Steve Roud

"Hanging stockings has pagan origins"

Hanging stockings is an odd tradition and no one is positive where it came from. In the 19th century, Clement C. Moore mentioned this custom in his work “A Visit From St. Nicholas” (more commonly known as ”Twas the Night Before Christmas”)
 
Tanya Gulevich notes in some parts of Europe kids would leave their shoes out for St. Nicholas instead of a stocking. (Gulevich) So this tradition likely came before Moore’s work and was a European folk tradition that made its way into America. There is one legend about St. Nicholas that may have been an influence on these traditions. You can read about that HERE. 
 
In Summary
No one is sure about where the tradition of hanging stockings for Christmas came from, but these sources listed here are good ideas. However, there is no evidence it originated from pagan worship rituals.
 
*Sources:
“A Visit from St. Nicholas” by Clement C. Moore

"Santa Clause has pagan origins"

Santa Clause has often been accused of being a Christianize pagan diety. Allegedly, someone took old tales of Odin, a Norse god, and trasferred them to St. Nicholas to create the modern Santa Clause. However, there are no primary sources to support this.
 
The name Santa Clause comes from Sinterklaas, which is the Dutch name of St. Nicholas. St. Nicholas is the patron saint of children and was a popular saint, even among Protestants after the Reformation (especially among the Dutch). The feast day of St. Nicholas was originally on December 6th and became a popular holiday in Europe by the 16th and 17th centuries. After the American Revolution, Dutch immigrants in New York began to promote many of their traditions, including the veneration of St. Nicholas. At this time in New York, Christmas had devolved into a drunken celebration and many leaders like Thomas Nask and Clement Moore began to promote the idea that Christmas should be a family-centered holiday. St. Nicholas’ gift-giving traditions were moved to Christmas and he was rebranded from a Catholic Priest to look like a traditional Dutchman from that time period (including being dressed in a big red suit). After this, the fictional character of Santa Clause became quite popular and was exported around the world over the next one hundred years. For example, in 1927 in Finland, a radio broadcaster named Markus Rautio, morphed the old pagan diety Joulupukki into a “Santa” figure.
 
In Summary
Instead of Santa coming from a pagan diety, the evidence suggests that Santa evolved from a Catholic saint and was later blended with pagan images from various cultures.
  
*Sources:
“A Visit from St. Nicholas” by Clement C. Moore

In the above resources, many of them articulate some reasons to question if Christmas actually originated in paganism. I wanted to list the common argument presented, then address the issues with it. Here is the argument:

A. Pagans did X (pagan ritual)

B. Christian/Christmas tradition Y is similar to X

C. Therefore, Y should not be practiced

As I’ve listed in the resources above, there are some Christmas traditions that absolutely have no connection to pagan worship and is pure conjecture. These include: yule logs, nativity scenes, gift-giving, stockings, and more. Then there are other Christmas traditions that have no conclusive evidence for or against them because of cultural conglomeration, being lost to history, or two or more conflicting source materials. These include: kissing under the mistletoe, Santa Clause, Christmas trees, and the December 25th birthdate. To say that a specific Christmas tradition has a direct connection to pagan worship is mere conjecture. There is no conclusive evidence.

Let me give an example of what would be conclusive evidence. There is a claim that Christians took the pagan celebration of Sol Invictus around December 25th and made it the celebration of Christmas. There is much debate about this and both sides actually have some good arguments. I won’t get into the weeds here, but Dr. Michael Heiser has a talk on this HERE to learn more. In summary, there is no conclusive evidence that Aurelian’s pagan festival of the “Birth of the Unconquered Sun” was instituted before the church started to recognize Christ’s birth. There is also no conclusive evidence for vise-versa. Hypothetically, if we discovered an ancient document where an early church father wrote about how Christians intentionally took this pagan festival and purposefully rebranded it to celebrate Christmas, then this would be conclusive evidence for an anti-Christmas argument. In the same way, if we discovered an ancient letter where Emperor Aurelian noted how he moved this sun worship celebration to December 25th to conflict with Christ’s birth on purpose, then this would be conclusive evidence for a pro-Christmas argument. However, there is no such thing of either of these. There is some evidence for both sides of the argument, but it is virtually inconclusive.

Here is an example of why this is important. As a parent, I deal with dishonest children. If one of my kids tells me something that I think is a lie, I usually weigh the arguments for and against it. Maybe this child is telling the truth, because here is some evidence they are honest. But then I see evidence that they might be lying after all, so maybe they are lying. Should I just give them a severe discipline before I figure out if they are, in fact, lying or not? I don’t think that would be wise. It would be more damaging to their soul if I discipline them for lying but find out later they were telling the truth. So instead, I should continue looking for conclusive evidence for the truth. If I cannot find it, I still should not “jump the gun” and discipline them. In the same way, if there is a Christmas tradition that has conflicting sources about its pagan origins, it is not wise to jump to one side or the other, or we will end up playing the useless game of “Well, I think my source is better than your source.”

Instead, we can approach some of these arguments and be content with not having conclusive evidence for one side or the other. If this is the case, then maybe we should approach these arguments from a third angle. In this next section, I will explain how it does not even matter if there is conclusive evidence Christmas has pagan origins.

logic

 Below are counter-arguments to the anti-Christmas claims using logic.

1. Genetic Fallacy

It does not matter if there is conclusive evidence that pagan worship was directly associated with Christmas traditions because of the genetic fallacy. A genetic fallacy (also known as the etymological fallacy) is a faulty logic which insists that the origins of a person, idea, institute, or theory determine its character, nature, or worth. Let me give an example.

The origins of the swastika symbol actually has positive meanings. In ancient Indian Sanskrit, the symbol meant “well-being.” By the 1900s, the symbol was a good luck charm and was “enthusiastically used as an architectural motif on advertising and product design.” (BBC) However, today this symbol does not have the same meaning. The swastika symbol was taken by Nazi Germany in the 20th Century and would now be linked to the atrocities committed under the Third Reich.

Now, let’s try a thought experiment. What would happen if I would go into a Jewish synagogue wearing a red shirt with a big swastika on the front of it? I would be asked to leave most likely. But what if I make my case? I say, “Wait! I know this is a symbol of fear, suppression, and extermination of the Jewish people. But the swastika actually has good origins!” How would you respond? It would be absurd if they were content with my offensive shirt. It does not matter what the origins of the symbol meant. What really matters is what it means today. It is not a good luck charm anymore, but rather a symbol of hate and anti-semitism. This is the genetic fallacy and its absurdity lived out.

In the same way, if someone were to prove that Christmas did indeed have pagan worship origins (which we discussed above has no conclusive evidence), it would not matter because of how we celebrate Christmas today. Today, no child sits on Santa’s lap and then worships him as the ancient Norse god, Odin. Today, no adult worships the evergreen tree as they kneel down to pick up presents from under the tree. They are not thinking, “I want to give adoration and praise to this fir tree. Praise the almighty Christmas tree!” All because something had a specific origin, it does not mean it retains that origin. People, societies, symbols, and language change over time through impactful events, cultural conglomeration, and even economic realities.

In summary, the genetic fallacy argument does not hold ground in the anti-Christmas argument.

2. Double Standards

 A double standard is when someone only applies an idea to one thing but not another, even though they are seemingly similar situations. Here is an example I have seen played out many times as a youth pastor. There are some Christian parents who do not let their children engage in Harry Potter (books or movies) because it has witchcraft and magic in them. However, many of these same parents let their children engage in The Lord of the Rings (books or movies) even though it also has witchcraft and magic. This is a double standard.

Some anti-Christmas groups have double standards in their reasoning. 119 Ministries, an anti-Christmas Hebrew Roots ministry, tries to downplay the genetic fallacy and utterly fails by giving a double standard. In their documentary, “The Christmas Question”, they make the claim that even though Christmas traditions don’t look the same as they did in ancient pagan holidays, we still should “avoid the festivals of the pagans.” They try their best to address the genetic fallacy counter claim, but try to avoid it altogether. However, 119 Ministries has another video on their Youtube channel where they try to address the question “Is It Wrong To Celebrate Birthdays?” They admit that pagan cultures around the world had different traditions on birthdays and conclude in this video, “We do know that later the Romans celebrated birthdays and it even involved cake. But there was nothing about their celebrations connected to false god worship. So there’s really nothing to say that celebrating your birthday is participating in a pagan custom. And just because pagans do something does not automatically make it wrong. If it did we literally wouldn’t be able to do anything – ever.” That’s odd. They can say that etymology has a profound impact on Christmas, but when it has to do with something they want to celebrate, like birthdays, they say that etymology does not matter. This is a double standard where they are not willing to apply their same logic to other similar areas. 119 Ministries also says, “The Bible never promotes nor condemns the practice of birthday celebrations. Each of us can determine for ourselves whether or not this is a custom we’d like to participate in.” I totally agree with this statement! In the same way, the Bible never promotes nor condemns the practice of celebrating Christ’s birth. If you would like to participate you can. If you do not want to participate, then don’t participate. Why don’t they apply their anti-Christmas celebration logic to their anti-birthday celebration logic? This is a double standard that this Hebrew Roots ministry is blinded to.

If we apply the genetic fallacy ideology to Christmas traditions, then we must apply this ideology in all areas of our lives to avoid a moral double standard. Here are a few areas in our lives we must apply this:

  • Days of the week. You must rename the days of the week to a different name because of the pagan origins (e.i. Thursday was named after Thor, the Norse god of Thunder)
  • Months of the Year. You must rename some of the months of the year to a different name because of pagan origins (e.i. March was named after Mars, the Roman god of war.
  • Celebrating Birthdays. Pagans also used modern birthday traditions we have today in their practices.
  • Wearing wedding rings or bands. It signified a covenant and was worn on the second left finger.
  • Bonfires. You must refrain from having a bonfire with friends because of its use in ancient pagan worship.
  • Certain Brands and Companies. You must refrain from buying products at any of these businesses because of their pagan names:
    • Starbucks (logo is Twin Tailed Siren from Greek mythology)
    • Versace (logo is Medusa, a Greek goddess)
    • NBC (logo is a peacock’s feathers which originated from Hera, a Greek goddess)
    • Tennessee Titans (The Titans of Greek mythology)
    • Nike (the Greek goddess of victory)
    • Dove (branded after the Greek goddess of beauty and love, Aphrodite)
    • Pandora [radio and jewelry] (Greek mythology)
    • Saturn (car company named after Greek god)
    • Maserati (sports car brand uses Neptune’s trident as logo)
    • Ajax (cleaning product named after a Greek mythological warrior)

This is just a short list of the many things in our world that have had some connection to paganism. Obviously, I am fine with the names of the days of the week as well as wearing my Nike shoes to go to Starbucks. I am not worshiping these gods by doing these things. However, if you choose to be consistent in your genetic fallacy ideology, you must avoid everything in our world that has a connection to paganism to avoid a double standard.

3. Correlation / Causation Fallacy

If two things appear to be correlated, this doesn’t necessarily indicate that one of those things are caused by or linked to the other thing. This is also called “false equivalency” and it’s an argument like comparing apples to oranges. Many anti-Christmas arguments center around comparing pagan winter festivals to a Christian Christmas today. Below is a table created by R.L. Solberg comparing the two. After seeing the major differences between these two ideas, one can only find similarites in them only if they already have presuppositions that Christmas is a pagan holiday.

Pagan Winter Festivals

  • The purpose is to appease the gods in the hope of a good harvest in the new year
  • Agricultural in nature
  • Based on the winter season
  • Includes the worship of idols, pagan gods, nature, and/or the weather
  • Future-focused. Believers hope for a future work of the gods in the coming season that will benefit them
  • The focus is on the gods meeting the physical needs of the people
  • Requires believers to give gifts and make sacrifices to the gods

Christian Christmas

  • Has nothing to do with appeasement, harvests, or the new year
  • Has nothing to do with agriculture
  • While Christmas is celebrated in winter, it is not based on the season. In fact, Jesus was most likely not even born in the winter
  • Includes the worship of the one true God of the Bible
  • Past-focused. Believers remember a one-time historical event when the Word became flesh and dwelled among us (John 1:14)
  • The focus is on the God of Israel having already met the spiritual needs of the people
  • Remembers that Yahweh gave a gift to the people by sending his only Son to save us

4. Anecdotal Evidence Fallacy

In place of logical evidence, this fallacy substitutes examples from someone’s personal experience. Arguments that rely heavily on anecdotal evidence tend to overlook the fact that one (possibly isolated) example can’t stand alone as definitive proof of a greater premise. Here’s an example of this fallacy: “I don’t think anyone should eat at that restaurant because I didn’t like the food.” That may be true that you didn’t like the food, but it doesn’t mean that the restaraunt does not serve good food. That was just your experience.

Some say that they don’t celebrate Christmas (and also say no one should celebrate Christmas) because of the fact that our culture exhibits bad behavior around Christmas time. It is true that crime rates go up around Christmas time, like burglary, shoplifting, drunk driving, and domestic abuse. Some parents are also fed up with their children when they seem ungrateful when receiving Christmas gifts. It doesn’t help that businesses spend billions of dollars each year to market their products in hopes of families spending more money with them instead of the competition. These ideas seem to undermine the values of a Christian Christmas, where it is the celebration of the greatest gift of all, Jesus Christ.

While we should not ignore these truths, we have to admit that this is anecdotal evidence to not celebrate Christmas. All because some families have bad experiences during this season does not mean that the entire holiday should be labeled as “bad”. There are many ways that we could combat the cultural pull of a secular Christmas and hold to the truths of this joyous celebration.

5. Cherry-Picking Fallacy

Also known as “confirmation bias”, this fallacy is the common tendency to notice, search out, select and share evidence that confirms one’s own standpoint and beliefs, as opposed to contrary evidence. 

Here’s it’s logical form:

Evidence A and evidence B are available.

Evidence A supports the claim of person 1.

Evidence B supports the counterclaim of person 2.

Therefore, person 1 presents only evidence A.

As we have discussed in the previous section on “FACTS”, we must admit that there are is some evidence for some Christmas traditions that may have come from paganism. However, this is not conclusive evidence. 119 Ministries, an anti-Christmas Hebrew Roots ministry, does this many times in their documentary “The Christmas Question”. They have scholars give evidence to support their claims for what they believe to be true, but do not ask them questions to know what else is true that goes against their claims. (Check out the response to them below) They pick and choose what information to give to their audiences. In this page, I have admitted (like the December 25th origins) where there are some evidence for both sides of the arguments.  I could only say that the evidence supports my claims, but this is dishonest and bad scholarship.

Some anti-Christmas arguments cherry-pick the data that only show evidence for their claims, while omitting the rest.

P

additional info

Response to "The Christmas Question" by 119 Ministries

coming soon

Summary

1

This is the defense of a Christian Christmas celebrating Christ’s birth, not a secularized version of Christmas.

2

There claims that the Bible says we should not celebrate Christmas, but by understanding its context, using appropriate exegesis, and using  common sense, there is nothing in scripture that condemns celebrating Christmas.

3

There are various Christmas traditions that have many different origins from places all around the world. While there is some evidence that some Christmas traditions may have come from paganism, there is no conclusive evidence because of the presence of counter-evidence to suggest other alternatives.

4

Many anti-Christmas arguments can be refutted by just using their own logic against them. All because Christmas may have pagan origins doesn’t mean traditions still retain their pagan meaning. All because some traditions look similar to paganism doesn’t mean they are pagan. All because one has had a bad experience with Christmas doesn’t mean it’s all bad. And finally, all because some people cherry-pick evidence doesn’t mean that is the only evidence available.

5

Christmas is not pagan.

Matt Garcia

Matt is the creator of this website and curates resources on spiritual formation. He is a husband of Jesika and a father of 4 children. He also helps lead a house church. Follow him on Instagram to see what he's up to.

check out More resources