As Christmas approaches and hundreds of Nativity scenes are banned, it is interesting to think about Mr. Woodruff”s column in the Record-Bee.
Mr. Woodruff suggests that “Jesus was probably born in the spring …”
As far as the historical record is concerned, Mr. Woodruff could be correct. In fact, if he had said the summer or autumn, he would have also been correct since the only indication of either the month or day occurs in Luke 2:8, “Shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their fields at night …” During the winter, it was so cold that flocks were housed at night in Palestine.”
One would think that anyone so important as Jesus would have had thousands of words written about him in antiquity. (After all, more than five billion copies of the Bible have been printed to date!) But such was not the case. The diurnus publicus, a daily update on all the important events in the Roman Empire, which was posted daily in the Forum, did not record either Jesus” birth, life, or death as far as the historical record is concerned. In fact, the only non-Jewish historical source, didn”t report anything about Christ until after the end of the first century when Pliny the Younger wrote to the Emperor in 112 A.D.
So, where does that leave us in regard to Jesus” birth? Regardless of how one feels about Christianity and factual accuracy, the message of this greatest of all philosophers resonates through the centuries. One is drawn, therefore, to Mr. Woodruff”s conclusion: it really doesn”t matter when we celebrate Jesus” birth as long as we absorb his message: Love thy neighbor as thyself!
Charles Moton
Lucerne
