The Bible nowhere gives an exact date for Jesus’ birth, and the early Christians did not originally mark it at all. Various dates were proposed in the first centuries. For example, Clement of Alexandria (c. 200 AD) reports that different Christian groups speculated dates in late winter or spring – some even suggested April 20–21 – but none mentioned December 25. It was not until the 4th century that a fixed date appears. The Chronography of 354 (a Roman almanac) is the first record we have of a liturgical Christmas: under December 25 it notes “natus Christus in Betleem Judeae” – “Christ was born in Bethlehem of Judea. By 336 AD the Roman Church (under Emperor Constantine) was formally celebrating Jesus’ birthday on Dec. 25. This eventually became the norm in the West (January 6 remained common in the East for some time).

Early Christians developed symbolic reasons for December 25. One long-standing idea was that Christ was conceived on March 25 (the date of the Annunciation, or spring equinox) and so was born nine months later, on December 25. In late antiquity writers like Augustine of Hippo explicitly put it this way: “Christ… was conceived on the 25th of March… and He was born… upon December the 25th”. (March 25 was also thought to be the date of the world’s creation or of Christ’s crucifixion in some traditions, so the symmetry of death and conception on that day seemed significant.) These theological calculations explain why the winter solstice season was attractive to celebrate the Nativity. Historian Britannica notes that the 3rd-century Christian scholar Sextus Julius Africanus dated Jesus’ conception to March 25 – the “same date” of creation – yielding a December 25 birth. In short, Annunciation + 9 months = Christmas in early Christian thought.

Roman Calendar Festivals

December 25 also fell amid popular Roman winter festivals, leading later to the (mis)conception that Christmas was simply borrowed from paganism. In Rome the great festival of Saturnalia ran roughly December 17–23. It was a rowdy carnival of feasting, gift-giving and social role-reversal. But importantly, Saturnalia ended by the 23rd – it did not extend to the 25th. As Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin observes, Saturnalia “was over before December 25. A Christian celebration on the latter day would not supplant Saturnalia. Likewise, Britannica points out that Saturnalia inspired modern Christmas customs like gift-giving, but it fell short of covering December 25 itself.

• Saturnalia (Dec 17–23). The Roman feast of Saturn (god of agriculture) took place in mid-December. By the late Julian calendar it ran from the 17th through the 23rd. It was indeed wintertime revelry – but it ended before Christmas Day.

• Sol Invictus (Dec 25). In 274 AD Emperor Aurelian created the “Birth of the Unconquered Sun” on December 25, to honor the sun god Sol Invictus. This royal cult feast coincided with the winter solstice’s return of longer days. Some modern writers have speculated that early Christians adopted Dec 25 to compete with this pagan festival. However, the only ancient evidence of a Sol Invictus feast on Dec 25 comes from that same Chronography of 354 – which records a “Birthday of the Unconquered” on that date. Notably, this Roman almanac lists it alongside the Christmas entry. Catholic scholars point out that the document never explicitly identifies the “Unconquerable” as the sun – it might well refer to Christ himself. In fact, one could equally argue that a Christian celebration of Christ’s birth already on Dec 25 may have influenced or merged with the imperial solstice observance.

• Mithra (Dec 25?). Some later writers claimed Mithra’s followers observed a Dec 25 birthday for their savior-god. However, ancient sources for a Mithraic birthday on exactly Dec 25 are thin. The Britannica article mentions Mithra’s feast on that date was believed by some Romans, but this is not well-attested in contemporary pagan texts.

December 25 coincided with mid-winter festivities (Saturnalia ended on Dec. 23, Sol Invictus was set on Dec. 25), no early Christian text says “we chose Christmas to replace a pagan feast.” Ambrose of Milan (4th century) could praise Christ as the “true sun” who outshines pagan gods, but he nowhere hints that the Church rigged the calendar for political reasons. Later scholars (in the Middle Ages and modern era) speculated about Christian opportunism, but even Pope Benedict XVI has noted that theories of Christmas as a reaction to Sol Invictus “can no longer be sustained”. In fact, early Christians were generally keen to distance themselves from pagan religion (at least until Constantine’s time). Christmas may later have acquired some seasonal customs in Europe, but the choice of December 25 itself appears to rest on Christian calculation and symbolism, not a deliberate pagan cos­mic calendar hack.

Theological Symbolism and Calculations

Early Christian writers saw deeper meaning in the December 25 date. One influential idea was that Christ’s conception, crucifixion, and birth form a divine pattern. By this reasoning, if Jesus died on March 25 (then equinox), he was also conceived on March 25, and thus born nine months later on December 25. An anonymous 4th-century North African treatise explicitly states: “our Lord was conceived on the 8th of the kalends of April in the month of March [March 25], which is the day of the passion of the Lord… For on that day he was conceived and he suffered”. In simpler terms, “conception (Annunciation) and crucifixion on March 25; birth on Dec 25.” Church Fathers repeated this connection. Augustine of Hippo, writing in On the Trinity (c. 400 AD), affirms it: “He is believed to have been conceived on the 25th of March… and He was born… upon December the 25th”. In the West this gave practical calendars: March 25 (Annunciation) plus nine months equals December 25 (Nativity). (Indeed, the Feast of the Annunciation was traditionally observed on March 25 in many churches.)

Another symbol arose from the nature imagery: Christ as Light of the world. Early Christians often depicted Christ as a new sun or dawn. Ambrose says Jesus is the “true sun” who outshines the fallen pagan gods. The winter solstice – the day after which the sun’s light returns – was a natural metaphor for Christ’s birth. Thus December 25, the Julian winter solstice, came to be seen by believers as God’s providential timing to send the Light into darkness. In this way, the Church Fathers tended to interpret the coincidence as sign of divine choice, not as mere coincidental overlap with Roman cults.

Debunking the “Pagan Origins” Myth

Many modern critiques claim “Christmas is a pagan holiday in Christian dress,” but these oversimplify or ignore the evidence. Christian apologists and historians alike note that no genuine ancient Christian source says the date was invented to mimic Sol Invictus or Saturnalia. For example, Jimmy Akin points out that if the Chronography of 354 does record a Sol Invictus feast on Dec 25, it’s ambiguous, and the Christian author elsewhere lists Christ’s birth on Dec 25 in the same document. In other words, the first written record of Dec 25 being sacred is a Christian one for Christ, with “Unconquered” mentioned in passing. Critics must leap to conclusions unsupported by the sources.

Church leaders of late antiquity never wrote “we are co-opting a pagan festival.” On the contrary, they acted as if celebrating on Dec. 25 was simply commemorating the actual birth of Christ. The very notion of deliberately subverting paganism by date-shifting only appears in much later writings (a marginal note in a 12th-century Syriac manuscript, and 19th-century scholarly speculation). Catholic historian Jimmy Akin observes that if Christmas and Sol Invictus are both Dec 25, we lack evidence which borrowed from which – it could even have been the other way around. As another voice puts it: the fathers “celebrated December 25 simply because they believed that’s when Jesus was born”. No early Christian says “Let us assign Christ a birthday on the solstice to lure pagans.”

Moreover, some expected “pagan parallels” in the date-selection do not even check out. Saturnalia was done by Dec 23, and Aurelian’s Sol feast wasn’t codified until 274 AD – decades after Christians elsewhere were already marking Dec 25. If anything, December 25 had a longstanding association in Rome with the returning sun (“bruma” or winter solstice) dating back to the Julian calendar reforms. Christian writers then repurposed that concept in worship of Christ (calling Him “novus sol”). In sum, scholarship today generally rejects the old theory that Christmas was fixed on Dec 25 to usurp pagan holidays. The historical and theological roots of the date lie primarily in Christian tradition, with pagan overlap being largely coincidental or a later confluence.

Early Sources and Church Fathers

To recapitulate the patristic evidence: Clement of Alexandria (c. 200 AD) shows there was no consensus in early Christianity and does not list Dec 25 among suggestions. By the mid-4th century, however, the Roman Church routinely observed Dec 25 (as the Chronography of 354 provesbiblicalarchaeology.org). No Church Father explicitly endorses the pagan-origin theory. Instead, writers like Ambrose and Augustine speak of December 25 in religious terms. For instance, Ambrose calls Christ the true sun and (in a homily) envisions new light at Christmas. Augustine, as noted, connects March 25 and Dec 25 in a profound Christological symmetry. Even Tertullian (citing popular tradition) placed Christ’s Passion on March 25 and thus his Nativity nine months later. None of these early writers ever says “we picked Dec. 25 to replace [Saturn or Mithra].”

In fact, one can find 4th-century sermons exhorting Christians not to mimic pagan feasts. Epiphanius of Salamis (Panarion 51.22) explicitly warned against idolaters’ practices around the winter festivals. Pope Leo I (d. 461) even rebuked people who tried to “worship the sun on December 25 and treat it as the Lord’s feast”. These remarks indicate Christian leaders were sensitive to pagan cults, but again not that they were rearranging Christmas to coincide – they were urging believers to avoid pagan habits on Christ’s feast day.

Lastly, it bears saying that the Church’s commemoration of Christmas is not a doctrinal claim about the actual date of birth. As Jimmy Akin and others note, celebrating a feast on a certain day doesn’t assert that the historical event literally fell on that day. Indeed, some Eastern churches long kept Jan 6 as Christmas (with December 25 as Epiphany). What matters is honoring Christ’s incarnation; the calendar date is, in the end, a matter of tradition and liturgical rhythm, not literal biography.

The selection of December 25 for Christmas grew out of early Christian calendrical calculations and symbolism (Annunciation on March 25, returning light of the world), rather than a simple borrowing of pagan rituals. While later Christmas customs absorbed much folklore, the foundational choice of Dec 25 has solid grounding in Christian thought. As one historian summarizes, early Christians took “the coincidence [of solstice and Nativity] as a providential sign”, and no authoritative Christian text reports a cynical “date-switch” plot. Christmas may stand at the crossroads of seasons and cultures, but its date ultimately reflects the faith of the early Church in Christ’s cosmic significance, not a pagan pedigree.

Sources:
If you would like to deepen your understanding of the subject, contact us for more information at our email address, and/or leave a comment below. You can also check other sources discussing the same subject below:
Early evidence from Chronography of 354biblicalarchaeology.org; Clement of Alexandriabiblicalarchaeology.org; theological calculations (e.g. Julius Africanus, Augustine)britannica.combiblicalarchaeology.org; Roman festival chronologycatholic.combritannica.com; Church Fathers (Ambrose, Epiphanius, Leo, etc.) and modern scholarshipbiblicalarchaeology.orgcatholic.com, including Catholic and academic analysescatholic.comcatholic.com.