Some have argued that Christmas is a pagan holiday. American Thinker’s Selwyn Duke explains, “I’m sure you’ve heard the charges. Christmas is a ‘pagan holiday,’ they say. It originated with a celebration dedicated to Saturn (the Roman god of agriculture) which, upon coming to full flower, took place between December 17 and 23. Or perhaps it was inspired by the commemoration of a sun-god’s birth. Here we have two candidates: the Indo-Iranian god Mithras and the Roman god Sol. And people often seem to confuse these two deities and their festivals, mixing and matching them in a game of musical myths. But it doesn’t really matter because both Mithras’ and Sol’s mythical births, we’re told, occurred on the same day: December 25th”
First of all, just looking at the word it self, it is “Christ-mas”. Christ is literally inside the name, it’s hardly something pagan when Jesus is inserted into the very word. Second of all Selwyn Duke also notes, “Mithras’s birth nor the celebration of Sol’s even occurred on the 25th”
Also, many are pretty sure that Jesus was not actually born on the 25th either. Many use this as an argument against Christmas. But does this actually change anything? No. Duke says that this “shouldn’t stop any educated person — from celebrating Christmas.”And she adds:
George Washington was born on February 22, yet we commemorate his birthday the Monday before. Now, I’ve yet to hear someone say, ‘This is a fraud! I shall not yield to this distortion of history, and I’ll have you know, Sir, that I intend to show up at work on February 15 — same as always. Stick that in your revisionist pipe!'” American Thinker, December 24th, 2009
She also gives the example of celebrating someone’s birthday before it actually happens. Is this wrong? Does that mean that that person is “void”? Of course not! The point is this: The date of Christ’s birth does not alter the fact that He died to save sinners, or that Jesus is known for performing miracles. We do not celebrate when Jesus was born, but rather, that Jesus was born.