Jesus was born in late September or early October of 4 BC, around the Feast of Trumpets, not in December. Scripture never states this outright, but internal evidence points to it. Luke says Joseph and Mary traveled to Bethlehem for the Roman tax registration, which was normally held after the fall harvest, when people were free from their fields and had money to pay. The fall holy days also explain why there was no room in the inn: Jews were traveling to Jerusalem for the festivals, and Bethlehem, only about six miles away, would have received the overflow. The strongest argument is that shepherds were keeping watch over their flocks in the fields at night (Luke 2:8). In Palestine the rainy season runs from late October to early April, with the worst weather between December and February, and around Jerusalem much of the 24 inches of annual rain falls in winter. Shepherds would not have kept sheep out in that rain and cold. The best estimate is that Jesus was begotten near the end of December and born the following autumn.

Neither Matthew nor Luke gives a birth date for Jesus, and honest scholars and theologians admit that winter is perhaps the least likely time. December marks the start of the rainy season in Palestine, and shepherds would have stopped keeping their flocks in the fields at night a month or two earlier. Majority opinion places the birth in autumn, probably on or near the fall festivals of Trumpets or Tabernacles. The December date therefore has no biblical authority, and the Gospel accounts show that the traditional Christmas teaching rests on a foundation of sand. Other features of the traditional Nativity are also unbiblical. The Gospels never say there were three wise men; that number comes from the three gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. By the time the wise men arrived, Jesus was a young Child living in a house (Matthew 2:11), not a newborn in a manger, so crèches wrongly merge Luke's shepherds with Matthew's wise men, who came weeks, months, or perhaps two years later. Mark and John skip the birth and begin with Jesus' baptism, because His ministry, death, resurrection, and present work as High Priest matter more than His infancy. Keeping a false holiday in His name is a lie that cannot honor Him, whereas keeping His commandments does (John 14:15; 15:10).

Jesus was not born on December 25; Luke's chronological clues point to the fall of 4 BC, which undercuts the foundation of Christmas. Zacharias served in the course of Abijah, the eighth of twenty-four priestly courses (I Chronicles 24), which rotated weekly from Nisan 1. Since Jesus was born in 4 BC, John must have been conceived in the first half of 5 BC. Zacharias's service therefore fell in June, and Elizabeth conceived shortly afterward. Mary conceived in Elizabeth's sixth month, December. John was born in the spring of 4 BC, and Jesus about six months later, between September 16 and 29, near the Feast of Trumpets. Other details support a fall birth. The census requiring travel to Bethlehem would most likely follow the fall harvest, when taxes were collected. The inns were full because pilgrims had arrived for the fall festivals, and no similar influx occurs in December. Shepherds were still in the fields at night (Luke 2:8), whereas flocks were normally penned once the cold, rainy season began. Adam Clarke likewise argues that the flocks were not out in the fields in December, so the December nativity should be given up. Knowing the true date does not call for celebrating a birthday, since Christ commands remembrance of His death (I Corinthians 11:23-26). It does expose Christmas as a falsehood, helps disprove the Good Friday-Easter Sunday tradition, and confirms that God's Word is historically accurate.

The celebration of Christmas on December 25 is rooted in historical inaccuracies concerning the birth of Jesus Christ. It is evident that He was not born during the winter solstice, as this timing aligns with the Roman festival of Saturnalia, which was merged with a celebration of His birth in the early fourth century to ease the transition of new converts to Christianity. A thorough search of the Bible reveals no command or suggestion to commemorate the Savior's birth, highlighting a significant discrepancy in the traditional practice of Christmas. Furthermore, the Bible does not specify the exact date of His birth, with the most plausible deduction pointing to autumn rather than winter. This raises questions about the validity of celebrating His birth on a day that does not correspond to historical or biblical evidence.

Jesus Christ was not born in the winter season, as evidenced by the presence of shepherds abiding in the fields, keeping watch over their flocks by night when He was born. In Judea, shepherds always brought their flocks in from the mountainsides and fields by mid-October to protect them from the cold, rainy season that followed. The Bible itself indicates that winter was a rainy time, unsuitable for shepherds to remain in open fields at night. Ancient Jewish custom was to send sheep out to the fields about the time of Passover in early spring and bring them home at the start of the first rain in October or November. Since the shepherds had not yet brought their flocks home, it suggests that October had not commenced, and therefore, our Lord could not have been born on December 25th, nor later than September, as the flocks were still in the fields by night. This feeding of flocks by night in the fields serves as a chronological fact that challenges the notion of a December nativity. The exact date of Jesus' birth remains entirely unknown, and if God had intended for us to observe and celebrate Christ's birthday, He would not have so completely hidden the precise date.

The birth of Jesus Christ, the One who gave up His divine prerogatives to become flesh, occurred in Bethlehem of Judea, where Mary, a virgin betrothed to Joseph, delivered Him in a stable or grotto. She wrapped Him in swaddling cloths and laid Him in a manger, as angels had announced. Shepherds soon arrived from the fields to witness His birth, spreading the word and praising God. Later, wise men from the East came, offering gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh, and worshipping Him. However, the timing of His birth was not in winter. Late fall and winter in Palestine bring rain and cold, and shepherds typically bring their flocks in from the fields by October at the latest. Additionally, details surrounding John the Baptist's conception and birth further indicate that a winter birth for our Savior is unlikely. At best, this time of year might align with the time of Jesus' begettal by the Father.

The celebration of Jesus Christ's birth on December 25 originated as a means of aligning with the pagan Roman festivals of Saturnalia and Brumalia, which occurred near the winter solstice. This timing was selected for convenience rather than any historical basis, as no biblical or early evidence supports a December date for the event. Shepherds remained in the fields at night during the birth, a practice incompatible with the cold and wet conditions of late December in the region, when flocks were customarily moved into protective folds by autumn. Available indications instead place the birth in the fall of 4 BC, possibly coinciding with one of the annual feast days. Had God intended His people to observe the occasion, clear instructions and a precise date would have been provided in the same manner as the commands recorded in Leviticus 23 for the true holy days. No such directive appears anywhere in Scripture. Jesus, the apostles, and the early church observed only the weekly Sabbath and the festivals outlined in Leviticus 23, with repeated New Testament references confirming these practices while making no mention of any birth commemoration. The absence of any biblical command or apostolic example underscores that December 25 holds no scriptural validity, and adherence to the commanded holy days instead brings the promised blessings of obedience.

Jesus Christ was most likely born in the fall. Counting back nine months from that time places the conception in winter, on Kislev 24, when the power of the Most High overshadowed Mary and caused her to conceive the Messiah. This date aligns with the second Kislev 24 prophecy in Haggai, which identifies the ultimate fulfillment of Zerubbabel's role as Jesus Christ, the perfect governor and ruler from the Davidic line. Zerubbabel was called God's servant, chosen by God, and received God's seal, just as Jesus Christ was. God set His seal on Zerubbabel and, more importantly, on his descendant the Messiah. The imagery of Haggai 2:19 supports this timing through a play on words. The question whether the seed remains in the barn uses a term elsewhere rendered child or posterity, and Zerubbabel's name itself means seed of Babylon or planted in Babylon. When God promised Abraham that in his seed all nations would be blessed, the reference pointed to Jesus Christ. The verse describes a moment after planting but before fruit appears, which corresponds to a Child conceived yet unborn. Through that Child the blessing of cleansing and leadership would reach Judah, Israel, the church, and ultimately the world. God chose the bleakest season of short days and long nights to announce that from this day forward He would bless, a blessing whose highest expression would come through the perfect leadership, work, and cleansing sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

Christmas did not occur in the dead of winter. Shepherds and their flocks would have deserted the fields at that season. The wise men arrived sometime later, when Jesus was a child rather than an infant, and they presented gifts solely because they recognized Him as King, not to mark His birth or to distribute presents among family and friends. No biblical record shows the early church observing the date of His birth, and no divine command authorizes such a practice. Instead, Scripture directs believers to commemorate His death each year at Passover. These facts expose Christmas as a tradition containing no truth beyond the bare statement that the Son of God was born of a woman. The celebration therefore constitutes aimless conduct inherited from human forefathers, offered without regard for whether it aligns with the requirement to worship in spirit and truth.

esus Christ's actual birth date remains unknown but occurred sometime in autumn rather than December. It notes that early Christian writers such as Origen recorded no scriptural precedent for observing the day of Christ's birth, contrasting this with pagan Roman festivals of Saturnalia and Brumalia that fell between December 17 and 25. Historical sources indicate that December 25 was originally the Dies Natalis Solis Invicti, the birth of the invincible sun, a date later reassigned by the Roman church in the fourth and fifth centuries to mark the winter solstice and the birth of the sun god. This reassignment allowed pagan winter-solstice rites to continue under a Christian label once Emperor Constantine shifted Sunday observance. The unknown autumn date precludes any scriptural warrant for a December celebration. Attempts to justify the date by claiming Christ does not care about timing ignore the requirement to worship in spirit and in truth. Mixing pagan customs with the worship of God produces spiritual confusion, suppresses truth, and leads participants to exchange God's commands for human traditions that cannot profit.

Mainstream depictions of Jesus Christ's birth inaccurately place the event in winter, as seen in widespread nativity scenes that contradict the Bible's clear statements on the timing. These images persist because mainstream Christianity relies on visual representations rather than the text-based truths of God's Word, a practice that directly violates the second commandment's prohibition against making any carved image or likeness for worship. The commandment establishes language, specifically God's Word, as the sole physical medium through which He reveals Himself, highlighting a fundamental contrast between images and language in conveying meaning. Images function through concrete, physical objects that limit understanding to sensory experience, whereas language operates abstractly, enabling comprehension of attributes and realities beyond direct observation. Applied to the nativity, visual scenes convey only that Jesus Christ was born in a barn to a man and woman visited by three guests, omitting essential truths such as His identity as the divine Son of God, His conception by God the Father through the virgin Mary, and His fulfillment of messianic prophecy. This reduction of spiritual significance to a physical level exemplifies the broader danger of images, which diminish God by confining His attributes of love, mercy, and power to human sensory categories and thereby creating idols rather than representing the true God. The same principle appears in depictions of the crucifixion, which portray Jesus Christ merely as a suffering man instead of the living propitiation for sins who grants eternal life. Such practices reflect an arrogance that ignores the second commandment, lowers God to a humanly conceived level, and erodes proper respect for His authority among those called as sons and daughters in the body of Christ.