Christmas is a fake

Christmas has nothing to do with Jesus Christ

25 December is venerated by Christians as the birthday of Jesus Christ - their ‘saviour who was born from a virgin’s womb’. But, many of us don’t know that the core ideology of Christmas was lifted from the 3400-year-old tradition of another religion known as Zoroastrianism, whose founder Zarathustra was hailed as the ‘saviour’ as late as BC 1400. Jesus’ Immaculate Conception saga is only a remake of Zarathusthra’s earlier story and the new script was written by early Christian leaders led by the apostle Matthew.

Vimal

What is the greatest moment in world history? If I am asked this question, I will stick my neck out and say, “It is the moment when Jesus Christ was born in the land of Judea.” Jesus’ life story inspired generations and continue to inspire. Christians believe that Jesus was born from the womb of Virgin Mary by Immaculate Conception. The story of Jesus’ miracle birth is chronicled in the Holy Bible by two apostles – Luke and Matthew. Although both of the talk about the same event, they contradict each other. According to Matthew, Jesus was a born aristocrat, a successor to the throne of David and Solomon. But, Luke disagrees saying that Jesus’ family belonged to a less exalted stock, leading to the image of a “poor carpenter”. On his birth, he was visited by low-time ‘shepherds’, says Luke. But according to Matthew, Jesus was visited by imperial scholars who traveled all the way from the North in search of the newly-born King. There are other contradictions as well. Luke says that Jesus’ family lived in Nazreth from which they traveled to Bethlehem to participate in a census conducted by the orders of Augustus Caesar. (Historical writings, including those of Strobo and Flavius Josephus prove that such a census never happened.) It was during the Bethlehem journey that Mary delivered Baby Jesus in a manger. But Matthew has a different story. According to his version, Jesus’ family had been well-to-do residents of Bethlehem all along, and Jesus himself was born not in any manger, but in his house, where the scholars visited him. (Refer Luke 2: 1-14 and Matthew 2: 1-11)
What might be the reason behind these contradictions? Why is Matthew presenting the birth of Jesus the Messiah- the divinely anointed saviour - in a totally different perspective? Unsolving this mystery will take you more than 1400 years before the life time of Jesus Christ and give you the name of the original “Messiah”. He is Zarathustra, who lived in present day Iran and founded the first monotheistic religion Zoroastrianism in around 1400 BC. It was the Zoroastrian tradition which first anticipated the birth of a Messiah from the womb of a virgin. Zarathustra named the Messiah as ‘Soashyant’ in his cryptic work known as ‘The Gathas’. In his ‘Ahunavaiti Gatha’ Chapter 30, Verse 9, he prophesize about future saviours who will clean the world of its impurities.
It is interesting to see how the idea of a divinely anointed Messiah traveled from Zoroastrianism to Judaism and from there to Christianity. The Jews got a taste of this idea in the 6th Century BC, while they were in Babylonian captivity. Being unsuccessful in their effort to free themselves from the Babylonian yoke, Jews lost their self-belief and were hoping for a miracle. It happened when the Persian emperor Cyrus vanquished the Babylonians and granted freedom to the Jews. Cyrus and his Persian subjects were followers of the Zoroastrian religion and overjoyed by their freedom, Jews hailed him a ‘Messiah’. (Isaiah 45:1). The ‘Messiah’ concept soon became part of the Jewish tradition.
As we know, all Christian apostles were Jews and they might have strongly felt the need to exploit this tradition and introduce Jesus as a Messiah born out of a virgin. It was particularly true with Matthew, who had thorough knowledge of Zoroastrian thought. It was by virtue of this scholarship that Matthew was sent to preach Christianity in the Zoroastrian populated areas of Syria, Parthia, Cappadocia and Armenia.

Matthew’s Strategy
While he was narrating the birth of Jesus Christ, Matthew insists that the baby was visited by a group of scholars known as ‘Magi’. Who were the Magi? ‘Magi’ was the contemporary term used for the Zoroastrian priestly class. So, it is evident that Matthew was targeting the Zoroastrian audience while explaining that Zoroastrian priests acknowledged the divinity and authority of Jesus by prostrating before him. We should also consider the possibility that Matthew was aware of the Zoroastrian myth predicting the virginal conception and birth of future ‘soashyants’ (saviours). An expectance, which has been fulfilled by the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem.
Matthew concentrated his evangelical energy among the Zoroastrians and considering his meticulous planning, he had to be successful. Indeed he was, and he proudly announces later that ‘the knowledge of Jesus spread throughout Syria” (Matthew 4:24).

Fixing December 25
The date on which Jesus was born is mentioned nowhere in the Bible. The apostles and early believers never seemed to be concerned about such trivia. The birth date was decided sometime in the 4th Century AD. In 321 AD, Emperor Constantine converted himself and his Roman subjects to Christianity. In Rome, there was a powerful cult called the ‘Mithras’ who worshipped the Sun God. It was their practice to celebrate December 25 as the Birthday of Sun. (The day being ‘Winter Solstice’ had Sun at the farthest point from earth, making it appear small like a ‘new-born’.) When the Mithraic leaders converted and occupied leadership positions in Rome’s Christian hierarchy, they swapped ‘Sun’ with ‘Jesus’ and fixed December 25 as the Birthday of Lord Jesus Christ. This practice was ratified in the Church Council of Hippo in AD 393. Even our Christmas tree is a concept borrowed from the Germanic tribes in Western Europe who worshipped their baby-God Audin by placing decorated Oak trees in their front yards. Audin’s tree metamorphosed into the Christmas tree after the Germanics were converted by St. Boniface.

Celebrating Plurality
Christmas is fast approaching and the santas are dressing up in red. On this occasion of happiness, I vouch on my tremendous regard for Christianity as a religion and Jesus as a historical figurehead. But unfortunately, we live in an era of aberrations. Some Christian leaders in Kerala are even advising their kinsmen to sent their children to Christian schools only, so that the kids don’t stray away from ‘Christian tradition’. Let them be reminded that Christian tradition is not an independent one. It has borrowed heavily from other traditions and religions. And the evolution of ‘Christmas’ from Zoroastrianism gives us a taste of the plurality and interdependence among world religions.