No, Christmas Isn't Pagan
Stop believing the myth
**CITATIONS ARE NOT LISTED ON THIS POST BUT IF YOU WANT ANY, SHOOT ME A DM AND I’LL SEND YOU A FULL LIST ;)**
RESOLVED, Christmas is a holiday with pagan origins & tradition. Therefore, Christians should not celebrate it.
If you want a solid & concise defense of this position, check out
’s post on this topic. Very well done! She also has a podcast interview with a Pagan Wiccan that is important to this debate. Both are linked below -
CONTESTED,
Some claim that December 25th was chosen as Christmas Day because it coincided with Saturnalia, a thoroughly pagan and immoral Roman festival that ran from December 17th to 25th. According to this theory, early Christians wanted to make Christmas more popular and easier for Romans and pagans to accept by “copying” Saturnalia. They argue that Christmas is essentially a repackaged version of this festival, which was filled with debauchery, sacrifices, and immorality. They claim that because of this, Christmas is illegitimate, and should not be celebrated.
This claim doesn’t hold up. First, there’s no concrete evidence that Christians “ripped off” Saturnalia. As Kevin DeYoung suggests, it’s more likely that early Christians deliberately defied Saturnalia by placing their holy celebration of Christ’s birth right in the middle of it. This wasn’t an attempt to blend in but a bold, symbolic rebuke of pagan practices.
Admittedly, there’s no definitive proof for either side of the argument—whether Christians copied or defied Saturnalia. However, considering what we know about the early church, it’s far more likely that the choice of December 25th was an intentional assertion of Christ’s supremacy over pagan traditions, not an attempt to make Christianity more palatable. Early Christians during Constantine’s time were known for “taking over” pagan festivals—not to blend with them, but to purge them of immorality and proclaim the gospel.
So the argument that Christmas is a pagan holiday borrowed from Saturnalia falls apart when we consider the intentions and actions of the early church. The goal was probably never assimilation but transformation—turning a season of darkness into a celebration of the true light of the world, Jesus Christ.
But the case against the supporters of the “pagan Christmas” theory continues. I’m going to take a direct quote from Kevin DeYoung’s Desiring God article on this topic -
“….there is no mention of birth celebrations from the earliest church fathers. Christian writers like Irenaeus (130-200) and Tertullian (160-225) say nothing about a festival in honor of Christ’s birth, and Origen (165-264) even mocks Roman celebrations of birth anniversaries as pagan practices. This is a pretty good indication that Christmas was not yet on the ecclesiastical calendar (or at least not widespread), and that if it were, it would not have been tied to a similar Roman holiday.This does not mean, however, that no one was interested in the date of Christ’s birth. By the late second century, there was considerable interest in dating the birth of Jesus, with Clement of Alexandria (150-215) noting several different proposals, none of which was December 25. The first mention of December 25 as Jesus’s birthday comes from a mid-fourth-century almanac called the Philocalian Calendar. A few decades later, around AD 400, Augustine would indicate that the Donatists kept Christmas festivals on December 25 but refused to celebrate Epiphany on January 6 because they thought the latter date was a recent invention. Since the Donatists, who arose during the persecution under Diocletian in 312, were stubbornly opposed to any compromise with their Roman oppressors, we can be quite certain they did not consider the celebration of Christmas, or the date of December 25, to be pagan in origin. McGowan concludes that there must have been an older North African tradition that the Donatists were steeped in and, therefore, the earliest celebrations of Christmas (we know about) can be dated to the second half of the third century. This is well before Constantine and during a time period when Christians were trying to steadfastly avoid any connections to pagan religion.”
DeYoung also mentions the interesting fact that if Dec 25th of Saturnalia was indeed turned into Christmas by the early Christians in order to make Christmas more popular, there is a shocking absence of any church leaders writing or “advertising” the holiday, to get the word out to the pagans who are supposed to be drawn in by Christmas being held on December 25th.
Because of this, I want to assert that picking December 25th as the date for Christmas actually had nothing in the slightest to do with Saturnalia or Sol Invictus (the final day of the Saturnalia feast.)
When you trace the historical record back to find out where the December 25th date for Christmas originated from, you discover that it actually came from a Christian historian named Sextus Julius Africanus, in the 2nd or 3rd century. This dude tried to make a full Christian history, from Creation to modern-day. In his book, Chronographiai, he places the actual conception of Jesus being around March 25th. This is based off calculations from the Gospels. Naturally, if Jesus was conceived on March 25th, it would mean that He was born roughly nine months later. Exactly nine months from March 25th is…..you guessed it! December 25th. This claim was supported by multiple contemporaries of Africanus, including Tertullian.
This consensus among church historians of that period seems to have started the tradition of holding a celebration of the birth of Christ on December 25th. It’s also maintained by multiple influential historians that Sol Invictus was actually originally held in early December—and was moved to the 25th by Emperor Aurelian, in order to compete with the growing popularity of the Christian’s celebration: Christmas. There’s even a whole group of modern-day historians who assert that Saturnalia was created in order to compete with Christmas. Not Christian scholars, but honest ones.
Finally, the other side says that it’s impossible Christ’s birth was in December, because the shepherds were out at night tending their flocks….something that they could only do in the springtime, due to weather conditions in the Middle East. They say that because we have the wrong date, Christians should not celebrate Christmas.
Again, this is a very weak argument. To explain why, I’m going to quote Joe Heschmeyer at length:
“At first glance, the scene pictured in Luke 2:8 seems unusual. Shepherds abiding in the field keeping watch over their flock by night. But…..there’s actually two things unusual, not just that they’re watching the flock by night, but also that it says shepherds doing it. Why? Because [Kent Brown] says, ‘Usually an older child or young teenager in the family stays with the sheep through the night, rather than an adult.’ And then he gives two examples from scripture, 1 Samuel 16:11, 1 Samuel 17:15, where the Hebrew text reads, ‘Young David watches over his father’s sheep.’“Even today,” Brown says, ‘children of Middle Eastern shepherds mind the sheep through the night, whereas the adults spend night out of doors only during the birthing period or during a crisis.’ So Brown concludes, Luke’s description features adult shepherds who are with the sheep, therefore, the nighttime scene points to the lambing season in the springtime. That reasoning seems solid enough if you assume American sheep, but of course, that’s not what you would have in the Middle East. What would you have? Well, most likely Awassi sheep.
M.H Fahmy, in Encyclopedia of Dairy Sciences Third Edition, points out these are the most widespread sheep breed of non-European origin, and they’re popular in the Middle East. And do we know about Awassi sheep? Well, Helmut Epstein, who is at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem at the time, this is in 1982, I think he’s retired now or maybe deceased, says that during the lambing season, lambs born in the field and still too weak to follow their dames are carried by the shepherd to the tents or villages where they remain for a few days until strong enough to join their dames at pasture.
In other words, the reason the shepherd stays in the field during lambing season is because the newborn lambs aren’t strong enough to fend for themselves and you don’t want to trust the kid. You want the adult shepherd there to do the hard work of the lambing process and making sure the lambs survive. And what else do we know? Well, as he explains, Awassi sheep, the principal lambing season is in November in Iraq, but in Lebanon & the Syrian Arab Republic in Israel, it’s December to January. In other words, it’s not surprising at all that adult shepherds would be watching their sheep at night in December. Now, that doesn’t automatically prove December 25th is the right date, but this common argument that it couldn’t have been December 25th because the shepherds are keeping watch at night is just wrong about the nature of the agricultural landscape.”
So where did this idea of Christmas being pagan actually originate? The answer is that it came from the Puritans in the 16th & 17th centuries. According to historical records, the strait-laced Puritans were extremely concerned with how the world was celebrating Christmas. Probably for good reason. From what we can see, the secular world at that time had quite a bit of fun with Christmas….perhaps a little too much fun, and in the wrong direction.
But the Puritans, in responding to this wrongdoing, over-corrected. As Wes Huff puts it, they “threw the baby out with the bathwater.” The Puritans went so far as to assert that Christmas shouldn’t even be celebrated. This was supported by a later book from the end of the 19th century, by a Scottish minister named Alexander Hislop. Hislop wrote a book on the matter, and as Huff points out in his blog post, the book makes incredible claim after incredible claim about history, without any citations or proof to back anything up.
Another thing noted by Wes Huff is the book written (in support of Hislop’s crowd) by Dan Brown (the Da Vinci Code). This writing is interesting for a number of reasons. The most prominent reason is probably the reason I will never accept the fact that Christmas has pagan roots—even if I was convinced of the claim’s historical truth.
In his book, Brown makes the audacious claim that nothing in Christianity is original. He compares Jesus with Mithras, a Roman god. Mithras was reportedly called the “Son of God” and “Light of the World”. By pointing this out, Brown is claiming that Jesus Himself was just a Mithras copycat, and these names for him & traditions were merely invented by the early church and stolen from the pagans.
I’ll begin my refutation of this by saying that we are treading on extremely dangerous ground here. Extremely dangerous ground. If a modern-day Brown stood up in my church next Sunday and said something like that, I’d be in favor of openly rebuking him in front of the entire church and beginning church discipline. Plus quite a few counseling sessions with wiser, older men in the church. And if that didn’t work? Excommunicate the man. Close the Kingdom to him. The things Brown is saying are things no Christian should ever say. I’m not fully sure if it’s actual blasphemy or not…..but if it isn’t, it’s awfully close.
Why do I mention Brown and his abominable book? I want to show where this road leads. If you’re willing to believe that Christmas is a pagan holiday, than you have to agree (by the same logic) with Brown, and his accusation of Jesus being a Mithras copy-cat. We know the church did it with Christmas, so what would have stopped them from doing it with God incarnate?
So what’s the problem here? The problem is that the Bible, the inspired Word of God, calls Jesus the Son of God & the Light of the World. So….are you willing to say that the Biblical canon was heavily influenced by filthy pagans?
Pretty sure we have a word for that. We call it “heresy”. The Bible was inspired by God alone, and no human effected any change in how it was written. The names for Jesus were known by the Godhead for eternity past, long before Creation was even Created. So yes, Brown is a heretic. And so is anyone who wants to follow that same road. Unfortunately, this is where the “Christmas-is-pagan” path leads. If you’re willing to surrender that celebration, you’re forced to admit that Brown now has a valid point. And that is why I will never surrender Christmas to the pagans, because if I did, then I would be forced to be consistent in my position and become a heretic.
Fun stuff, huh?One of the most popular arguments from the other side is simply “the Bible never said to celebrate Christmas.”
Not too long ago, I remember watching a debate between a Christian and another Christian on dinosaurs. The first Christian used the exact same argument in support of the theory that dinosaurs could not exist….”the Bible makes no mention of them”. The other replied something like this: “The Bible makes no mention of you. And yet you exist.”
My response would be very similar. There are thousands of things the Bible makes no mention of doing, nor commands them, and yet we still do them, and there is no wrong in doing them. For example, the Bible never commands pastors to get up and deliver a lengthy message every Sunday morning. Not once is that ever commanded, or even inferred. Sure, there are teachings, and teachers, but never a message from one man with the entire church body assembled in one building. And certainly not as the central part of the service.
So is preaching wrong? Not at all. Delivering a message to the assembled body of Christ every Sunday has a thousand benefits. I will admit, it does have its cons, and I think there is sufficient proof to indicate that it’s not the best way to do a church service. BUT, it’s not a bad thing in any way, shape, or form. God has used preachers to reach millions with the Gospel, saving many lost souls. Preaching every Sunday morning is a very good thing.
Is it mentioned in the Bible?
No.
But there’s nothing wrong with it.
And there are many Christians who would assert that celebrating Christmas is wrong, simply because it isn’t mentioned in the Bible….but will go next Sunday to their local church and sit for 30 minutes under the teaching of their pastor. This is not only inconsistent with their Christmas views, it shows that they don’t really believe what they’re saying. Or at least, don’t know enough to understand that their view is inconsistent with their behavior.
Jesus himself, in John 10, travels to Jerusalem in order to celebrate the Feast of Dedication. We now know the Feast of Dedication as Hanukkah. Nowhere in the Bible is Hanukkah commanded as a holiday to celebrate. Scholars have pinpointed it as being a Jewish holiday invented in the inter-testamental period. Does that matter? No. Jesus still goes and celebrates it. But if we’re operating by the logic that we can’t celebrate anything not commanded by the Bible, we have to admit that Jesus sinned. Dangerous waters, guys. Very dangerous waters.Christmas traditions. When you hear that, what do you think? For most people: gifts, a tree, lights, family, feasting, are all things that come to mind. The Christmas-is-pagan crowd condemns these things (specifically the tree, presents, and feasting) as being pagan traditions. But is this really the case?
When Jesus is born, we see the Magi coming from afar, from the East, to give him gifts (gold, frankincense, and myrrh). Right off the bat, the fact that this is recorded and portrayed as a very good thing (in Matthew 2) gives us Biblical grounds for surprising each other with gifts, especially to commemorate the birth of Jesus. Do you really think it possible that the inspired Bible would portray an evil, pagan tradition as a good thing? What’s more, this proves that the gift-giving traditions do not come from Saturnalia. The Magi weren’t Romans. Remember, it took them three years to come from the East and give gifts to the King who had been born. The fact is simply that this is very obviously the origin of the tradition of giving gifts to celebrate the birth of our Lord. Anyone who disagrees is welcome to do so; but first, I want them to sit down with a historical scholar who has spent his entire life studying the ancient Romans, and try to argue this point with them.
As Dr. David Gwyn, from the University of London, puts it: “The majority of modern [historical] scholars would be very reluctant to accept any close connection between the Saturnalia and the emergence of the Christian Christmas.”
I mean, you’re welcome to argue with them, if you still want to press the point. These PhDs know ancient history like the back of their hand. You wouldn’t last five minutes. Dr. Gwyn is evidently making clear that the consensus among scholars for that time period is that there’s no connection between the Saturnalia & Christmas.
In John 2, we also see the wedding celebration at Cana. Here, they are feasting for days on end—so much so, that the wine eventually runs out, and Jesus performs His first miracle by turning water into wine. This wedding celebration was fiercely Jewish, and they were feasting in celebration of a special day. Again, this proves that the idea of feasting didn’t come from the pagans. The Jews were already doing it. And Jesus does it!! With His disciples! Are you willing to say that Jesus & the disciples did acts of pagan worship??
What’s more, I want to quote a man named Lucian of Samasota. This guy was an actual Roman pagan from the time Saturnalia was celebrated. This is what he has to say about Saturnalia traditions:
“During [the] week, the serious is barred. No business allowed. Drinking and being drunk, noise and games and dice, appointing of kings and feasting of slaves, singing naked, clapping of tremulous hands, and occasional ducking of corked faces in icy water.”
I think that about destroys the claim that modern Christmas traditions were stolen from Saturnalia. In case anyone was wondering, that has literally nothing to do with Christmas, in the slightest. More commonly, this accusation is leveled against the pro-Christmas crowd with the Yule direction. I’ll address that later.
We can also deal with the tree. I will admit, at first glance, the arguments against having a tree are convincing. Jeremiah 10:1-4a states: “Hear the word, which the Lord speaks to you, O house of Israel. Thus says the Lord, do not learn the way of the Gentiles, for the customs of the peoples are futile. For one cuts a tree from the forest, the work of the hands of the workmen, with the ax. They decorate it with silver and gold. They fasten it with nails and hammers so that it will not topple. They are upright like a palm tree.”
This certainly does look like getting a Christmas tree and decorating it. But we need to look at the context. As always, in any form of Biblical analysis, context is the key.
In this particular context, we see that the Israelites are being forbidden against cutting down trees and turning them into idols. This is the common passage used against my side, and it’s used illegitimately. The opposition is purposely ignoring the end of verse 4: “they fasten it with hammer and nails, so that it cannot move”.
Definitely not something you would do to a cut-down tree.
Yes, something you would do to an idol.
But if there’s any doubt remaining, verse 5 removes it:
“Their idols are like scarecrows in a cucumber field,and they cannot speak;
they have to be carried,
for they cannot walk.
Do not be afraid of them,
for they cannot do evil,
neither is it in them to do good.”
This passage is clearly telling Israel to not make idols. There’s no admonition here against cutting down a tree and putting it in your house. Also, I’d like to point out, what is the difference between having a tree in your house and having plants in your house? Because I don’t really see one. And if you want to be consistent with the tree logic, you’ll need to go get every plant in your house and throw them out. So…..good luck maintaining that one.I’ve also heard a lot about the connections between Yule and Christmas. I won’t go into all the pagan celebrations people connect Christmas with, merely for the sake of keeping this article normal-sized. But Yule deserves a quick look, due to the amount of noise about it.
So what is Yule? Yule is a series of winter celebrations that happened in ancient Germanic & Scandinavian tribes. It took place right after the winter solstice, and symbolized the return of light and life after the darkest times of the year. Usually around late December, the family would burn a Yule log, sing, and have feasts. Sometimes they would sacrifice an animal, and have ritual dances to the god & goddess of fertility and life.
At first glance, it might seem like there are a lot of connections between Christmas and Yule. However, while there are similarities, the two holidays are fundamentally different. Take the Christmas tree, for example. It’s often claimed that it comes from the Yule log or other pagan traditions, but this isn’t true. Long before Christianity reached the tribes that celebrated Yule, early Christians began using the evergreen tree as a symbol of eternal life in Christ. Yes, other cultures used evergreens to represent life, but Christians didn’t “steal” the idea—they transformed it to point to Christ.And let’s be clear: there is absolutely nothing wrong with Christians adopting universal symbols, even ones used by cultures that practiced evil and worshipped other gods. In fact, this is what we’ve always done. As we fulfill the Great Commission—bringing the gospel to the nations—we also transform cultures. That means we take their symbols, holidays, and traditions, and we infuse them with Christian meaning. It’s not hypocrisy; it’s evangelism in action. The result isn’t a “paganized” Christianity, but a Christianized culture. If there’s a valid reason why this approach is wrong, I haven’t heard it—and I doubt you’ll find one either.
Finally, I want to end with actual Biblical proof that we should celebrate Christmas even if it was a pagan celebration. We’re not totally without support from the Word with this debate. The Bible does provide standards for how Christians engage practices that have associations with pagan origins. In 1 Corinthians 8 & Romans 14, the apostle Paul discusses the issue of eating food that has been offered to idols. Obviously, it doesn’t get much more pagan than that.
In these passages specifically, Paul is dealing with early Christians who are afraid that eating things sacrificed to idols was sin, because of the strong pagan connection. But Paul clarified that the act itself isn’t sinful. Instead, he emphasized this main point:
Intent Matters
“Food will not commend us to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do.” - 1 Cor. 8:8
“One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.” - Romans 14:5-6
The general idea here is not the action itself. It’s the intent. God doesn’t care if you eat meat sacrificed to idols, or observe holy days, or anything similar that doesn’t violate any moral law. But he has two stipulations. First, you must not try to force your own views on the matter on your brother in Christ. Second, you must be fully convinced in your own mind of the position you hold.
He goes so far as to say that if you (for example) believe eating pagan meat offered to idols is sin, you are weaker in the faith. All things are Christ’s, and all things are to be done to his glory. But if you believe that, even despite being technically wrong, and then go do it?
You’re sinning.
Not because the action itself is a sin, but because you believe it is, and believe that you are transgressing the law of God.With these non-moral issues, intent really does sanctify the practice. When I celebrate Christmas on December 25th, (assuming it was a pagan holiday), I do so with the sole intent of commemorating the greatest event the world has ever seen—the incarnation of God Almighty. And my intent sanctifies the practice.
Now, that doesn’t mean I can go murder someone, do it to the glory of God, and thereby sanctify the action. This principle only works for trivial, non-essential, non-moral matters…..like observing Sabbath, eating meat offered to idols, celebrating Christmas, etc.
So the points here are twofold. First, even if Christmas was a pagan holiday, it doesn’t matter. All good things are to be done to the Lord and for His glory. We see this from Paul with his handling of the eating-meat-offered-to-pagan-gods issue. And there’s nothing inherently wrong with modern Christmases. So go celebrate. Have fun & keep a clear conscience.
Second, be convinced in your own mind. If you really do believe Christmas is wrong, don’t celebrate it! If you believe Christmas is good, then celebrate it! And for those who do celebrate it, don’t flaunt it in front of your brothers and sisters in the faith who are of a different mind. In doing so, you sin.In conclusion, friends, I have an admonishment & an encouragement.
First off, If you are one who maintains that Christmas is a pagan holiday, I want you to consider the fact that your small band stands alone against the entire history of the church amassed. From the invention of Christmas on, until the Puritans, no one even thought to question the holiday….despite being much closer and more familiar with pagan traditions like Yule & Saturnalia. Thousands of scholars far more versed in history and Biblical knowledge have thought this out carefully, and supported the practice of Christmas. So tread carefully, and don’t fail to realize that it is no small thing to oppose the tradition of millions of Christians and thousands of years of exponentially increasing knowledge and research.And second, the birth of Jesus is the most incredible event in the history of the world. Nothing will ever even come close to it. So why should I, as a follower of the same, not celebrate it with a special holiday? And even if the holiday has pagan origins (which it doesn’t), I still don’t see a clear reason why I shouldn’t celebrate it. There is nothing evil about giving gifts. Nothing evil about putting a tree in your house. Nothing evil about feasting and spending time with your family. In fact, those are very, very good things.
The world is ours. Every holiday they have, every good thing, every celebration, was originally stolen from Christ. Why shouldn’t we take it back? We are to inherit the world…..so let us begin now. Do not grant the Enemy an inch, no, not a millionth of an inch. Hold fast and do not surrender. Do not lay down your arms and admit defeat by giving them back a holiday that is ours.
Please comment if you disagree or have any thoughts on this!! I’d love to hear them :)
Thank you so much for this post, Carson! Sorry it took my so long to read it lol. I got pulled away from it yesterday :P
Also, sorry that all my comments were via restacks, it probably got a bit messy lol. I was trying to respond to individual sections :D
Carson, thank you. This was absolutely fantastic. Thank you for speaking out and sharing your thoughts. (: