Ten Reasons why the Christmas myth is false

Has Satan made this angel put on tights

to tempt the faithful?

It  is time for a seasonal rant against the Christmas story.  Now I know you guys want to know about tights and see pictures of women in tights.  So I'm going to have to bribe you with some pictures.  Now in the first century pantyhose hadn't been invented, but fortunately I have found some images of older students doing the nativity story and some of them are wearing tights.

I do ask you to read the text, at least you won't believe the Christian myth and won't have to worry about being cast into hell for your pantyhose perversion.  On the other hand if the Christmas myth is false, that doesn't mean that Satan does not exist, just that Jesus cannot save you, so Satan may still drag you to hell for your perversion (He, He, He....).

1. The story in implausible
The Christian scripture says:

"This was how the birth of Jesus Christ took place. His mother Mary was engaged to Joseph, but before they were married, she found out that she was going to have a baby by the Holy Spirit."

Now I don't want to be unpleasant about this, but what is more probable - Mary had a miraculous pregnancy, or she got shagged by a member of the Roman legion?

Mary and the angels

2. The theory is implausible
According to orthodox Christian theory Jesus is God and Jesus is Man.  Now lets list the defining attributes of God.  God = {all-powerful, present everywhere, knows everything, does not have sex}.  Now the defining attributes of man.  Man = {Of limited power, present at one place at one time, does not know lots of stuff, has sex all the time (if only with himself)}.  Now you don't need to be Sherlock Holmes to spot a bit of a contradiction here.

An angel explains the mystery of the Trinity

3.  The sources are unreliable

Just checking out her Josephus

According to the Gospel of Matthew

"Jesus was born in the town of Bethlehem in Judea, during the time when Herod was king. "

Herod died in 4BCE.  However Luke records:

"At that time Emperor Augustus ordered a census to be taken throughout the Roman Empire. When this first census took place, Quirinius was the governor of Syria. Everyone, then, went to register himself, each to his own hometown. "

Unfortunately according to Josephus, the Jewish historian, Quirinius was not governor of Syria with authority over Judea until CE 6, when the province was brought under direct Roman control.   (See Internet Infelels for more)

Accessing Internet Infidels

 4.  There is no evidence of key events in the story
According to Matthew's gospel:

'Herod learned that the wise men had fooled him. He was very angry. He sent men to kill all the young boys two years old and under in Bethlehem and in all the country near by. He decided to do this from what he had heard from the wise men as to the time when the star was seen. Then it happened as the early preacher Jeremiah said it would happen.  He said, “The sound of crying and much sorrow was heard in Ramah. Rachel was crying for her children. She would not be comforted because they were dead.” '

This is a pure invention on Matthew's part. Herod was guilty of many monstrous crimes, including the murder of several members of his own family. However, ancient historians such as Josephus, who delighted in listing Herod's crimes, such as his plan to kill all Jewish elders on his death (described below), do not mention what would have been Herod's greatest crime by far. It simply didn't happen.

Satan deals with Herod

"He [Herod] then returned back and came to Jericho, in such a melancholy state of body as almost threatened him with present death, when he proceeded to attempt a horrid wickedness; for he got together the most illustrious men of the whole Jewish nation, out of every village, into a place called the Hippodrome, and there shut them in. He then called for his sister Salome, and her husband Alexas, and made this speech to them: "I know well enough that the Jews will keep a festival upon my death however, it is in my power to be mourned for on other accounts, and to have a splendid funeral, if you will but be subservient to my commands. Do you but take care to send soldiers to encompass these men that are now in custody, and slay them immediately upon my death, and then all Judea, and every family of them, will weep at it, whether they will or no." (Josephus Jewish War Book 1 33:6)

5.  The Christian Scriptures that mention the Christmas story are of a late date
Christians will claim that it does not matter that their scriptures are not supported by other sources because they are early and reliable sources themselves.

Unfortunately there is no evidence for the early date of these documents.  Most critical scholars place the date of the Gospel of Luke c 80-90, although some argue for a date c. 60-65.  CE 80 is 47 years after Jesus' death and 84 years after his birth.  Plenty of time for legends to occur.  All the witnesses of Jesus' birth would be dead by CE 80.  Even if we take the date as 60, this is 64 years after Jesus', again the witnesses to his birth would be dead.

But what is the evidence that Luke's gospel should be dated 80 CE?  The earliest manuscript of the gospel is P4 which is dated late C2 or early C3, say 180CE.  The situation is even worst for Matthew's gospel.  The earliest manuscript is P104 Oxyrhynchus dated 150-200 CE, but this manuscript does not contain the birth stories.  The first manuscript containing the actual birth stories is P45 Chester Beatty dated about 250 CE.  (For manuscript chart see Useful Charts)

Making a few notes from those useful charts

Given that the manuscripts are so late can we really date the gospels of Luke and Matthew so early?  On the basis of the evidence it might be better to assume a date of 150 CE - plenty of time for legends to grow up.  Of course Christians will claim that the gospels of Matthew and Luke are early - its just that the original manuscripts have been lost - no doubt thumbed to death by early Bible study groups.  This is however, a statement of faith.  What is more early manuscripts have survived - the Dead Sea Scrolls from 70 CE and a small part of John's gospel from 125 CE.

6. Lack of Bible evidence
Not only is there no independent corroborative evidence outside the Bible for the "Christmas Story", there is little evidence in the Bible itself.  The only Bible documents that mention the story are the gospels of Luke and Matthew.  Interestingly the gospel of Mark - agreed to be the earliest Biblical gospel - does not mention the story.  Nor do the letters of Saint Paul - apparently written even earlier (50 - 60 CE).  Not even the gospel of John mentions the Christmas story.  We would expect John to mention the story if he knew it, since it would support his view of Jesus as God and man. 

The shepherds are probably made up too

7. The Christmas story was generated from Greek myths

Where then, does the Christmas story come from?  I suggest that it has been made up from Pagan myths.  The early Christians needed Jesus to compete with the heroes of Pagan religion and philosophy.  So they took over the Pagan stories and applied them to Jesus.

Let's take the case of Plato who was thought to be born of a virgin.  Creating a similar myth for Jesus was not enough for the church, they had to rubbish other divine birth stories as this quotation from Origen, (Against Celsus, Book 1, Chapter 37) makes clear

"For some have thought fit, not in regard to ancient and heroic narratives, but in regard to events of very recent occurrence, to relate as a possible thing that Plato was the son of Amphictione, Ariston being prevented from having marital intercourse with his wife until she had given birth to him with whom she was pregnant by Apollo. And yet these are veritable fables, which have led to the invention of such stories concerning a man whom they regarded as possessing greater wisdom and power than the multitude, and as having received the beginning of his corporeal substance from better and diviner elements than others, because they thought that this was appropriate to persons who were too great to be human beings."

For more about the Pagan origins of Christianity see Pagan Origins of the Christ Myth

She's just finished checking out some Pagan Origins....

8. Mis-handling of the Old Testament

According to the Gospel of Matthew (Matthew 1.18–25 ):

"This was how the birth of Jesus Christ took place. His mother Mary was engaged to Joseph, but before they were married, she found out that she was going to have a baby by the Holy Spirit. Joseph was a man who always did what was right, but he did not want to disgrace Mary publicly; so he made plans to break the engagement privately.

While he was thinking about this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, 'Joseph, descendant of David, do not be afraid to take Mary to be your wife. For it is by the Holy Spirit that she has conceived. She will have a son, and you will name him Jesus – because he will save his people from their sins.'

Now all this happened in order to make come true what the Lord had said through the prophet, 'A virgin will become pregnant and have a son, and he will be called Immanuel' (which means, 'God is with us'). So when Joseph woke up, he married Mary, as the angel of the Lord had told him to. But he had no sexual relations with her before she gave birth to her son. And Joseph named him Jesus."

But if we look at the actual words of the prophet (Isaiah 7:13-15 ):

"Well then, the Lord himself will give you a sign: a young woman who is pregnant will have a son and will name him Immanuel."

What is going on here?  Well, young woman is what the original Hebrew text written by Isaiah says.  But a later translation into Greek mistranslated young woman as virgin.  So why did the writer of Matthew use the dodgy translation?  My explanation is that Matthew was not the good Jewish boy who saw Jesus teach.  "Matthew" was a Greek speaking Pagan writing 100 years after the event.  (See point 5 above about dating)  Having already decided Jesus needed a divine birth like Plato, "Matthew" found a verse to support his creation in the only "Bible" he could read.

But even if this explanation is not true, Matthew played fast and loose with the evidence picking not the best text but the one that supported his view.  Did Matthew treat his other sources with the same lack of respect?

A young woman?  Yes. A virgin? Not if he has anything to do with it

9. Would a good God create such a miserable festival

Think of the suicides, divorces, arguments and other horrors of Christmas.  Would a good God create such a festival?  (OK not a good argument but i like it!).

"So why the fuck am I at this Christmas 'celebration'?"

10. So what?
Even if the key event of the Christmas story - the virginal conception - is true, it doesn't prove much.  Perhaps some Pagan god impregnated Mary.

So what?  The Blessed Virgin is a fashion statement

Most scripture quotations from Christmas unwrapped, but some from Bible Gateway.

All together now.... Ah!