When discussing the accurate birthdate of Jesus Christ, I am often asked, “Isn’t is possible that Jesus was born on December 25th?” This question usually pops up during the discussion concerning which potential dates make reasonable candidates and which dates do not. Sometimes the question comes from someone who is legitimately asking, but more often than not, it comes from someone playing devil’s advocate, or frankly, trying to stir things up a bit.
Ironically, the question has real value, but not for the reasons one might think. This question provides an opportunity to discuss how the rules of evidence work, and how we reach reasonable conclusions.
For example, if you and I were sitting on a jury as part of a murder trial, and the defense attorney asked an expert witness, “Sir, based upon your expertise, isn’t is possible that someone else committed this crime?” The prosecuting attorney would immediately object, the objection would be sustained, and the question thrown out. Why? Because criminal investigations and trials are about determining what actually happened, not what may have happened, and the rules of evidence in a criminal case prohibit speculation. Historical investigation operates the same way. When investigating an historical event that occurred in the past, and we have little direct evidence, or we do have direct evidence, but we need to determine the credibility of that evidence, our objective is to determine as best as possible what actually happened based on the evidence available to us. It is not our job to speculate what may have happened. The reason for this is because both historically, and in criminal trials, virtually anything is possible, but not everything is reasonable.
It’s possible that you’re not actually reading this article but that it is being projected into your mind by a three-eyed interdimensional reptilian biped named Gustav. Possible? I guess. But is this a reasonable conclusion based on the evidence? Not hardly. This is why we are all familiar (due to television crime dramas) with the phrase “reasonable doubt.” Juries are instructed to reach a conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt, not a possible doubt.
Even if we do not have an eye-witness in a criminal case, if we have photographic evidence that shows the accused at the scene of the crime, we have fingerprint evidence, DNA evidence, tire imprints that match the accused’s vehicle, the murder weapon was found at the accused’s home with both the accused and victim’s blood on it, etc., and (again) the defense attorney asks, “Isn’t is possible that someone else committed the crime?” Of course it’s possible, but it is not reasonable—the evidence points to the accused not to some other possibility. The possibility that someone else committed the crime does not meet the standards of “reasonable doubt”—the possibility that someone else committed the crime is speculation.
So in a manner of speaking, “Is it possible that Jesus Christ was born on December 25th,” is a trick question. As I noted earlier, this question is often asked by someone playing devil’s advocate, or even deliberately trying to stir up controversy. And in today’s hostile environment between the faithful and religious skeptics, getting the faithful to say, “It’s possible,” is seen as a victory in the eyes of the skeptics, despite the fact that it actually proved nothing. Getting someone to say, “It’s possible,” does not necessarily prove them wrong, and it certainly doesn’t prove you’re right—that requires a little thing called positive evidence—evidence that demonstrates that your conclusions are correct.
It is possible that Jesus was born on December 25th? Given that virtually anything is possible, yes, it is “possible” that Jesus was born on December 25th. But is it reasonable to conclude that Jesus was born on December 25th? No. Why? Because there is no biblical evidence and extremely little historical evidence that points to a December 25th birthdate, and significant evidence that he was born on some other date.
In order to prove that Jesus was born on December 25th, one must present positive evidence that demonstrates that he was born on that date. A tradition that began several hundred years after he was born is not evidence.
Likewise, in order to prove that Jesus was born on some other date, one must present positive evidence that demonstrates that he was born on some other date. This is what God Save the King is all about.
Look for this evidence here at godsavetheking.org, and in the essays I have published on Patreon.
Stay tuned…