Letter to the editor: Another view on the real Christmas story

The letter “The real Christmas story” (Dec. 2, TribLive) claims Christ’s birthdate is unknown; I agree. However, our views then diverge.

Roman periodic censuses were used for tax, military and demographic purposes. Joseph’s family’s hometown was Bethlehem. Scheming to conform to prophesy is implausible. The Sanhedrin rejected Jesus as messiah, and the apostles personally knew both Jesus and Mary. Collaborating a hoax resulting in their horrific deaths and persecution is senseless.

Since “they” (stealers of pagan holidays) are undefined, perhaps the writer means the fourth century, when Christianity became the official Roman religion (amid political power struggles). Consequently, Christian holidays merged with Roman culture — Christ’s birth celebrated Dec. 25 (the date is inconsequential).

The writer disbelieves the virgin birth. Ancient mythology contains fables of virgin births, but they are just myths. It wasn’t created when “they” decided to admit gentiles into the “cult.” If referencing the above mentioned Roman-­Christian assimilation, the gospel had spread to gentiles centuries before. First-century Paul endured terrible suffering doing just that.

Jesus didn’t form a new “cult” but bridged the Old Testament into the New Covenant, where all nations graft into one branch. Biblical, archaeological and historical resources exist about Jesus and the true Christmas story.

Karen Frank

Bear Rocks