The birth of our Savior, Jesus Christ, as recorded in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, is a profound event surrounded by significant details. Contrary to common assumptions, His birth did not occur in winter. Evidence suggests that Jesus was likely begotten around the end of December and born near the end of September or in early October of the following year, around the time of the Feast of Trumpets in 4 BC. This timing aligns with the fall harvest and the Roman registration decreed by Caesar Augustus, which was typically conducted after the harvest when people had funds to pay the tax. Further supporting this timeframe, the presence of shepherds in the fields at night, as described in Luke's account, indicates a season outside of the rainy winter months in Palestine, which span from late October to early April, with the harshest weather between December and February. Shepherds would not have kept their flocks out in such cold and wet conditions, nor would they have chosen to endure it themselves. Thus, the announcement of His birth to the shepherds under the night sky points to a milder time of year, consistent with late September or early October.

The Nativity, the birth of Jesus Christ, is recounted in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, yet neither provides a specific date for His birth. Honest and objective scholars acknowledge that a winter date, particularly in December, is among the least likely times for this event. In Palestine, December marks the start of the rainy season, and shepherds would have ceased leaving their flocks in the fields at night well before then, likely a month or two earlier. The majority opinion suggests that Jesus' birth occurred in the autumn, possibly around the fall festivals of Trumpets or Tabernacles. These biblical details challenge the traditional timing of Christmas, revealing a discrepancy between historical evidence and the commonly celebrated winter date.

We are approaching the time when the world celebrates the supposed birth of Jesus Christ on December 25. For those in the church of God who do not observe Christmas, this difference often draws curiosity and questions about why we do not keep it. If we state that Christ was not born on December 25, we must be prepared to provide evidence. Luke's Gospel offers clues about the time of Jesus' birth, though no specific date or season is named. Luke, a well-regarded historian, provides a sound, orderly account of events that helps determine the general time of His birth. In Luke 1:5 through 2:8, a chronological sequence begins with Zacharias, a priest of the course of Abijah, who was visited by the angel Gabriel while serving in the Temple. Gabriel announced that Zacharias and his wife Elizabeth would have a son named John. In the sixth month of Elizabeth's pregnancy, Gabriel visited Mary, informing her that she would conceive and bear a son named Jesus. Mary then visited Elizabeth and stayed until the latter's ninth month, indicating Jesus was born approximately six months after John. Historical details in Luke's account, combined with the timing of the course of Abijah, suggest that John was conceived in the first half of 5 BC, placing Jesus' birth sometime in 4 BC. This evidence points away from a December 25 date and destroys the foundation of the Christmas holiday. Knowing the true timing of His birth renews faith in the accuracy of God's Word and equips us to provide common-sense reasons for our beliefs in a world of compromise and confusion. We must study and follow what is true to avoid being fooled by counterfeit traditions.

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.