What do you think?
Rate this book
The True Meaning of Christmas: The Birth of Jesus and the Origins of the Season
What does the Bible really say about the birth of Jesus? How did the celebration of Christmas become associated with things like Santa Claus and decorated trees? In The True Meaning of The Birth of Jesus and the Origins of the Season , biblical scholar Michael Patrick Barber offers an inspiring look at the Bible's accounts of Jesus' birth and the development of the Christmas season. Along the way, he answers numerous questions,
- GenresCatholic
190 pages, Paperback
Published October 20, 2022
5 people are currently reading
29 people want to read
About the author
Michael Barber
21 books24 followersMichael has his Ph.D. in Theology from Fuller in Pasadena, CA. His dissertation was on the Historical Jesus and Sacramental Eschatology under the world famous scholar, Colin Brown. He has an MA in Theology from Franciscan University of Steubenville and received his B. A. in Theology and Philosophy from Azusa Pacific University. He is the author of several books, including, 'Coming Soon: Unlocking the Book of Revelation and Applying Its Lessons Today' (Emmaus Road, 2006) and most recently, 'Genesis to Jesus: Studying Scripture from the Heart of the Church' (Servant, 2007), a Bible study co-authored with Kimberly Hahn. He is a Senior Fellow for the Saint Paul Center for Biblical Theology, founded by Dr. Scott Hahn.
Dr. Barber has been granted the mandatum by Robert Brom, bishop of San Diego, as an ecclesial recognition of Michael's posture and commitment to teach always in communion with the Church.
Dr. Barber has been granted the mandatum by Robert Brom, bishop of San Diego, as an ecclesial recognition of Michael's posture and commitment to teach always in communion with the Church.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
November 29, 2023
A CATHOLIC THEOLOGIAN LOOKS AT THE BIRTH BIBLICALLY AND HISTORICALLY
Catholic theology professor Michael Barber wrote in the first chapter of this 2021 book, “Although there are some falsehoods about Christmas and its origins that I would like to set straight, my focus in this book is not primarily myth-busting. Instead, I will argue that Christmas can only be disappointing when its true meaning is forgotten. I will show that when we understand what Christmas is REALLY about, we can never be let down by it… Christmas involves an invitation to a homecoming that surpasses our deepest longings. The problem is most people do not know the Christmas story well enough. The purpose of key aspects of the Christmas celebration have often been forgotten… we first need to return to Christmas’ home in the story of the Bible. Only by carefully reflecting on the stories of Jesus’ birth there can we hope to celebrate Christmas in the way it is meant to be celebrated.” (Pg. 4, 6)
He summarizes, ‘What have we seen here? First, God answers prayers. The same angel who announces to Daniel the coming Jubilee restoration of Israel appears again in the Gospel of Luke to reveal that the time of deliverance is at hand… Second, because the Messiah is coming, relationships can be healed… Third, God answers Zechariah’s prayers in ways that transcend his highest hopes… Not only is the Messiah on his way, but the Messiah HIMSELF is the Lord. Jesus is a Messiah greater than that which could have been anticipated.” (Pg. 34)
Perhaps surprisingly, he asserts, “The hymn, ‘Mary, Did You Know?’ communicates all the wrong lessons about the mother of Jesus. Mary does not need US to explain to HER what God has done. It is hard to understand how this song finds its way into churches each year. Is it a classic hymn? No… it was written [in]… 1984. Was it written by a legendary composer? No; it was written by Protestant Christian comedian Mark Lowry.” (Pg. 49)
He comments on Isaiah 7:14, “if the oracle addresses a situation in the 700s B.C., how can Matthew say it is fulfilled in Jesus?... Has Matthew made a mistake? To understand his use of Isaiah’s oracle, we need to recognize that the Gospel writer interprets it in a JEWISH way… At its most fundamental level, Isaiah’s Immanuel prophecy confirms God’s promise to preserve the kingdom of David… Isaiah’s oracle could therefore be used in reference to a FUTURE ruler, a coming son of David par excellence. In that future king, the Immanuel prophecy would find its deepest meaning. Matthew therefore naturally understands Jesus as the true ‘Emmanuel,’ the fulfillment of God’s promises… In Christ… David’s kingdom is preserved.” (Pg. 53, 55)
He states, “why is it so important that Mary is a ‘virgin’ in the first place? … her identity as virgin confirms that Jesus has no human father. He is the true Son of God, not by adoption, like the kings of the Old Testament, but by nature. The Virgin Birth reveals that while Jesus is fully human, he is also truly Emmanuel, ‘God with us.’” (Pg. 56)
He argues, “is it believable that Mary would have expected to remain a virgin after being betrothed to Joseph?... the Mishnah … indicates that married Jews would take vows of sexual abstinence … That Mary would have planned on practicing sexual abstinence after being married is therefore not as farfetched as some have made it out to be…it is not as clear as some people make it out to be that Jesus ‘brothers’ and ‘sisters’ are children of his mother… the Greek nouns … can also refer to cousins or other relatives… Moreover, none of the ‘brothers’ or ‘sisters’ are ever said to be children of Jesus’ mother… If we closely follow the way Mark’s Gospel unfolds, we find good reason to think that Jesus ‘brothers’ and ‘sisters’ are the children of a DIFFERENT WOMAN who is alive at Jesus’ death… John confirms what Mark also says: there was ANOTHER Mary at the foot of the Cross besides Mary the mother of Jesus… it seems … likely that Jesus’ ‘mother’s sister’ is ‘Mary the wife of Clopas.’ [Jn 19:25] If this other Mary is both the mother of James and Joses AND Jesus’ ‘mother’s sister,’ we have confirmation that James and Joses are Jesus’ cousins.” (Pg. 60, 62-65)
He asserts, “according to Matthew, Jesus has a royal genealogy because he is the legal son of Joseph… it is Joseph’s line that makes Jesus the ‘son of David.’ … Matthew will later make the point that Joseph is not Jesus’ biological father. This, however, does not threaten Jesus’ royal identity. for ancient peoples, biological descent was not necessary for royal succession.” (Pg. 72)
He notes, “Many have the impression that Jesus is born in some sort of stable… an outside structure designed solely for animals… Luke, however, never says this. It is important to read the Gospel story carefully… Luke reports that Mary places the baby ‘in the MANGER because there was no space for them in the ROOM.’ [Lk 2:7] The word translated ‘manger’ … likely refers to something like a feeding box or a trough… The manger is also probably not located outside… first-century Jewish homes would ordinarily involve a dirt floor with two rooms: (1) a main room where the entire family ate meals… and slept together; and (2) a private chamber for guests… The place near the door in the main room would be used to house the family’s domestic animals at night. Mangers could be placed there.” (Pg. 91)
He states, “many suppose that the reason the magi came to be viewed as a group of three is because Matthew describes them as bringing three gifts to Jesus… The earliest writer to portray the magi as a triad… was the early Christian scholar Origen, who never mentions the three gifts. Origen believes Jesus’ Gentile visitors are foreshadowed in [Gen 14]… [where] three pagans visit Isaac, the son of Abraham, seeking to establish a covenant with him… From Origen on, Christian tradition would portray the magi as a group of three. Later writers would identify them as a group of three because of their three gifts.” (Pg. 116-117)
He points out, “contrary to what we see in most nativity scenes, the shepherds of Luke and the magi of Matthew show up at Jesus’ birthplace at DIFFERENT TIMES. Herod seeks to kill the children from two years of age or younger, which might suggest he knows that the child Jesus is not a newborn. While Luke’s shepherds are said to arrive the manger on the night of Jesus’ birth, Matthew’s magi come after seeing the star heralding Jesus’ birth and traveling from some distance. It is perhaps significant that Jesus is called an ‘infant’ [Lk 2:12] … when the shepherds visit him… but … in Matthew … he is instead repeatedly called a ‘child’… The latter term in Greek can refer to a child from eight days old to seven years of age.” (Pg. 128)
He explains, “The view that Jesus was not a real person and that the Gospels’ accounts of him are … adaptations of pagan mythical stories is sometimes called Jesus mythicism.’ … we can speak of three major problems in the work of mythicists such as [D.M.] Murdoch. First… Contrary to what Murdoch says, there are no ancient accounts of Dionysus’ birth that indicate he was laid in a manger as a child. Her claim that the word ‘Gospel’ originally had a connection to magic is preposterous… it comes from the Greek word that means ‘good news’… Second, mythicists ignore the fact that certain pagan stories about ancient gods POST-DATE the New Testament… So, rather than thinking that the Gospel writers copied everything they reported from pagan mythologies, there are reasons to think the opposite was often the case… Third, while there are similarities between the Gospel accounts and stories about other gods, stark differences remain… For example, while characters like Dionysus were identified as the offspring of the gods, the accounts of how they were conceived are strikingly UNLIKE what is found in the New Testament… The parallels fail PRECISELY at the most crucial point: … Mary’s conception of Jesus is virginal, involving no physical act causing pregnancy.” (Pg. 134-136)
He contends, “the gospel writers did not think they were writing about a nonhistorical figure… ancient biographers did not have the same standards as modern historians… Writers were therefore not expected to give verbatim accounts of what was said by them… A certain ‘narrative elasticity’ was permitted… The variations we find in the accounts of Jesus’ life and death in the Gospels fit broadly within the expected parameters of ancient biographies… How the details of the different Gospel narratives fit together is not always clear. Still, to conclude from such difficulties that the entire Jesus story is fictional goes too far.” (Pg. 142-143)
He notes, “Eastern Orthodox Christians celebrate Christmas on January 7… because [they]… follow the old Julian calendar… [which] was in use from 46 B.C. until the 1500s, when Pope Gregory XVI introduced… the ‘Gregorian calendar’---that uses a more precise system of leap years… Eastern Orthodox Christians, therefore, still celebrate Christmas on ‘December 25,’ but it is the December 25… which corresponds to our January 7.” (Pg. 148)
He observes, “many have insisted that since Luke has shepherds out in the field on the night of Jesus’ birth (Lk 2:8), Christ could not have been born in winter. This assertion rests on … later Jewish sources that place the grazing period for sheep between April and November. Yet since these sources are dated centuries after the time of Jesus, their historical reliability on such matters is questionable. Furthermore, an earlier report from the Mishnah, a second-century source… implies that Passover lambs grazed in February, one of the coldest months of the year. If that is the case, there is no reason to think shepherds could not have been in the field in the winter… Furthermore, we cannot rule out the possibility of an unusually warm winter. All things being equal, the account of the shepherds’ location does seem to make a winter date less likely. Still, we should not hang too much on this detail.” (Pg. 149-150)
He states, “recent writers have argued that we can determine the time of year Zechariah had his encounter with Gabriel by … the fact that Zechariah is said to be from the priestly line of Abijah [Lk 1:5]… [But the] case that Zechariah’s priestly division served in the temple in September is chock-full of problems… First… of the later Jewish works such as the Babylonian Talmud… [and] the Dead Sea Scrolls… the data they provide is insufficient to reconstruct what was happening year by year in the Jerusalem temple. Second… we cannot assume that [priestly courses] ran without interruption or variations. Ancient Jews… did not have or regular system of ‘leap years’… In sum, we cannot determine when Zechariah was serving in the temple based on Luke’s narrative.” (Pg. 151-152)
He argues, “Many have placed the origins of Christmas in the Roman festival of Saturnalia… Yet the problem … is that their dates do not line up. Saturnalia ran from December 17 to December 23---NOT December 25!... A second … approach [suggests]… the day was chosen … because Romans worshipped a sun god [‘Sol Invictus’] on this date… Yet [this] notion is increasingly questioned by scholars… the first historical source that confirms that a pagan god was worshipped on December 25 is called the ‘Chronograph,’ which was compiled in A.D. 336… We therefore have no hard evidence that December 25 was connected to a sun god until the Chronograph… Remarkably, the Chronograph also contains the earliest contestable reference to the fact that Christians celebrated Christmas on December 25…” (Pg. 155-156)
He continues, “Many ancient Christian writers such as Julius Africanus believed that God created the sun on March 25… Africanus and others therefore placed the conception on this day… But why connect Christ and the sun?... various New Testament passages apply sun and light imagery to Jesus… Jesus’ conception marked the beginning of a new creation… It is no surprise, then, that December 25 became a popular date for Jesus’ birth. The date worked well with the winter solstice.” (Pg. 162-163) Later, he adds, “by choosing December 25, the Church chose to commemorate the birth of Jesus during a time of year that was already associated with feasting and celebration.” (Pg. 172)
He also notes, “there is good reason to believe Saint Nicholas was a real person… In around 260 A.D., Nicholas was born in… what is now the nation of Turkey. He went on to be ordained a priest. Eventually, he was named bishop of Myra… Many believe he attended the Council of Nicaea in the year 325, though the evidence for this is uncertain.” (Pg. 180-181)
This book will be of great interest to Christians (particularly Catholics) who want to know more about the birth of Jesus, and the Christmas feast.
Catholic theology professor Michael Barber wrote in the first chapter of this 2021 book, “Although there are some falsehoods about Christmas and its origins that I would like to set straight, my focus in this book is not primarily myth-busting. Instead, I will argue that Christmas can only be disappointing when its true meaning is forgotten. I will show that when we understand what Christmas is REALLY about, we can never be let down by it… Christmas involves an invitation to a homecoming that surpasses our deepest longings. The problem is most people do not know the Christmas story well enough. The purpose of key aspects of the Christmas celebration have often been forgotten… we first need to return to Christmas’ home in the story of the Bible. Only by carefully reflecting on the stories of Jesus’ birth there can we hope to celebrate Christmas in the way it is meant to be celebrated.” (Pg. 4, 6)
He summarizes, ‘What have we seen here? First, God answers prayers. The same angel who announces to Daniel the coming Jubilee restoration of Israel appears again in the Gospel of Luke to reveal that the time of deliverance is at hand… Second, because the Messiah is coming, relationships can be healed… Third, God answers Zechariah’s prayers in ways that transcend his highest hopes… Not only is the Messiah on his way, but the Messiah HIMSELF is the Lord. Jesus is a Messiah greater than that which could have been anticipated.” (Pg. 34)
Perhaps surprisingly, he asserts, “The hymn, ‘Mary, Did You Know?’ communicates all the wrong lessons about the mother of Jesus. Mary does not need US to explain to HER what God has done. It is hard to understand how this song finds its way into churches each year. Is it a classic hymn? No… it was written [in]… 1984. Was it written by a legendary composer? No; it was written by Protestant Christian comedian Mark Lowry.” (Pg. 49)
He comments on Isaiah 7:14, “if the oracle addresses a situation in the 700s B.C., how can Matthew say it is fulfilled in Jesus?... Has Matthew made a mistake? To understand his use of Isaiah’s oracle, we need to recognize that the Gospel writer interprets it in a JEWISH way… At its most fundamental level, Isaiah’s Immanuel prophecy confirms God’s promise to preserve the kingdom of David… Isaiah’s oracle could therefore be used in reference to a FUTURE ruler, a coming son of David par excellence. In that future king, the Immanuel prophecy would find its deepest meaning. Matthew therefore naturally understands Jesus as the true ‘Emmanuel,’ the fulfillment of God’s promises… In Christ… David’s kingdom is preserved.” (Pg. 53, 55)
He states, “why is it so important that Mary is a ‘virgin’ in the first place? … her identity as virgin confirms that Jesus has no human father. He is the true Son of God, not by adoption, like the kings of the Old Testament, but by nature. The Virgin Birth reveals that while Jesus is fully human, he is also truly Emmanuel, ‘God with us.’” (Pg. 56)
He argues, “is it believable that Mary would have expected to remain a virgin after being betrothed to Joseph?... the Mishnah … indicates that married Jews would take vows of sexual abstinence … That Mary would have planned on practicing sexual abstinence after being married is therefore not as farfetched as some have made it out to be…it is not as clear as some people make it out to be that Jesus ‘brothers’ and ‘sisters’ are children of his mother… the Greek nouns … can also refer to cousins or other relatives… Moreover, none of the ‘brothers’ or ‘sisters’ are ever said to be children of Jesus’ mother… If we closely follow the way Mark’s Gospel unfolds, we find good reason to think that Jesus ‘brothers’ and ‘sisters’ are the children of a DIFFERENT WOMAN who is alive at Jesus’ death… John confirms what Mark also says: there was ANOTHER Mary at the foot of the Cross besides Mary the mother of Jesus… it seems … likely that Jesus’ ‘mother’s sister’ is ‘Mary the wife of Clopas.’ [Jn 19:25] If this other Mary is both the mother of James and Joses AND Jesus’ ‘mother’s sister,’ we have confirmation that James and Joses are Jesus’ cousins.” (Pg. 60, 62-65)
He asserts, “according to Matthew, Jesus has a royal genealogy because he is the legal son of Joseph… it is Joseph’s line that makes Jesus the ‘son of David.’ … Matthew will later make the point that Joseph is not Jesus’ biological father. This, however, does not threaten Jesus’ royal identity. for ancient peoples, biological descent was not necessary for royal succession.” (Pg. 72)
He notes, “Many have the impression that Jesus is born in some sort of stable… an outside structure designed solely for animals… Luke, however, never says this. It is important to read the Gospel story carefully… Luke reports that Mary places the baby ‘in the MANGER because there was no space for them in the ROOM.’ [Lk 2:7] The word translated ‘manger’ … likely refers to something like a feeding box or a trough… The manger is also probably not located outside… first-century Jewish homes would ordinarily involve a dirt floor with two rooms: (1) a main room where the entire family ate meals… and slept together; and (2) a private chamber for guests… The place near the door in the main room would be used to house the family’s domestic animals at night. Mangers could be placed there.” (Pg. 91)
He states, “many suppose that the reason the magi came to be viewed as a group of three is because Matthew describes them as bringing three gifts to Jesus… The earliest writer to portray the magi as a triad… was the early Christian scholar Origen, who never mentions the three gifts. Origen believes Jesus’ Gentile visitors are foreshadowed in [Gen 14]… [where] three pagans visit Isaac, the son of Abraham, seeking to establish a covenant with him… From Origen on, Christian tradition would portray the magi as a group of three. Later writers would identify them as a group of three because of their three gifts.” (Pg. 116-117)
He points out, “contrary to what we see in most nativity scenes, the shepherds of Luke and the magi of Matthew show up at Jesus’ birthplace at DIFFERENT TIMES. Herod seeks to kill the children from two years of age or younger, which might suggest he knows that the child Jesus is not a newborn. While Luke’s shepherds are said to arrive the manger on the night of Jesus’ birth, Matthew’s magi come after seeing the star heralding Jesus’ birth and traveling from some distance. It is perhaps significant that Jesus is called an ‘infant’ [Lk 2:12] … when the shepherds visit him… but … in Matthew … he is instead repeatedly called a ‘child’… The latter term in Greek can refer to a child from eight days old to seven years of age.” (Pg. 128)
He explains, “The view that Jesus was not a real person and that the Gospels’ accounts of him are … adaptations of pagan mythical stories is sometimes called Jesus mythicism.’ … we can speak of three major problems in the work of mythicists such as [D.M.] Murdoch. First… Contrary to what Murdoch says, there are no ancient accounts of Dionysus’ birth that indicate he was laid in a manger as a child. Her claim that the word ‘Gospel’ originally had a connection to magic is preposterous… it comes from the Greek word that means ‘good news’… Second, mythicists ignore the fact that certain pagan stories about ancient gods POST-DATE the New Testament… So, rather than thinking that the Gospel writers copied everything they reported from pagan mythologies, there are reasons to think the opposite was often the case… Third, while there are similarities between the Gospel accounts and stories about other gods, stark differences remain… For example, while characters like Dionysus were identified as the offspring of the gods, the accounts of how they were conceived are strikingly UNLIKE what is found in the New Testament… The parallels fail PRECISELY at the most crucial point: … Mary’s conception of Jesus is virginal, involving no physical act causing pregnancy.” (Pg. 134-136)
He contends, “the gospel writers did not think they were writing about a nonhistorical figure… ancient biographers did not have the same standards as modern historians… Writers were therefore not expected to give verbatim accounts of what was said by them… A certain ‘narrative elasticity’ was permitted… The variations we find in the accounts of Jesus’ life and death in the Gospels fit broadly within the expected parameters of ancient biographies… How the details of the different Gospel narratives fit together is not always clear. Still, to conclude from such difficulties that the entire Jesus story is fictional goes too far.” (Pg. 142-143)
He notes, “Eastern Orthodox Christians celebrate Christmas on January 7… because [they]… follow the old Julian calendar… [which] was in use from 46 B.C. until the 1500s, when Pope Gregory XVI introduced… the ‘Gregorian calendar’---that uses a more precise system of leap years… Eastern Orthodox Christians, therefore, still celebrate Christmas on ‘December 25,’ but it is the December 25… which corresponds to our January 7.” (Pg. 148)
He observes, “many have insisted that since Luke has shepherds out in the field on the night of Jesus’ birth (Lk 2:8), Christ could not have been born in winter. This assertion rests on … later Jewish sources that place the grazing period for sheep between April and November. Yet since these sources are dated centuries after the time of Jesus, their historical reliability on such matters is questionable. Furthermore, an earlier report from the Mishnah, a second-century source… implies that Passover lambs grazed in February, one of the coldest months of the year. If that is the case, there is no reason to think shepherds could not have been in the field in the winter… Furthermore, we cannot rule out the possibility of an unusually warm winter. All things being equal, the account of the shepherds’ location does seem to make a winter date less likely. Still, we should not hang too much on this detail.” (Pg. 149-150)
He states, “recent writers have argued that we can determine the time of year Zechariah had his encounter with Gabriel by … the fact that Zechariah is said to be from the priestly line of Abijah [Lk 1:5]… [But the] case that Zechariah’s priestly division served in the temple in September is chock-full of problems… First… of the later Jewish works such as the Babylonian Talmud… [and] the Dead Sea Scrolls… the data they provide is insufficient to reconstruct what was happening year by year in the Jerusalem temple. Second… we cannot assume that [priestly courses] ran without interruption or variations. Ancient Jews… did not have or regular system of ‘leap years’… In sum, we cannot determine when Zechariah was serving in the temple based on Luke’s narrative.” (Pg. 151-152)
He argues, “Many have placed the origins of Christmas in the Roman festival of Saturnalia… Yet the problem … is that their dates do not line up. Saturnalia ran from December 17 to December 23---NOT December 25!... A second … approach [suggests]… the day was chosen … because Romans worshipped a sun god [‘Sol Invictus’] on this date… Yet [this] notion is increasingly questioned by scholars… the first historical source that confirms that a pagan god was worshipped on December 25 is called the ‘Chronograph,’ which was compiled in A.D. 336… We therefore have no hard evidence that December 25 was connected to a sun god until the Chronograph… Remarkably, the Chronograph also contains the earliest contestable reference to the fact that Christians celebrated Christmas on December 25…” (Pg. 155-156)
He continues, “Many ancient Christian writers such as Julius Africanus believed that God created the sun on March 25… Africanus and others therefore placed the conception on this day… But why connect Christ and the sun?... various New Testament passages apply sun and light imagery to Jesus… Jesus’ conception marked the beginning of a new creation… It is no surprise, then, that December 25 became a popular date for Jesus’ birth. The date worked well with the winter solstice.” (Pg. 162-163) Later, he adds, “by choosing December 25, the Church chose to commemorate the birth of Jesus during a time of year that was already associated with feasting and celebration.” (Pg. 172)
He also notes, “there is good reason to believe Saint Nicholas was a real person… In around 260 A.D., Nicholas was born in… what is now the nation of Turkey. He went on to be ordained a priest. Eventually, he was named bishop of Myra… Many believe he attended the Council of Nicaea in the year 325, though the evidence for this is uncertain.” (Pg. 180-181)
This book will be of great interest to Christians (particularly Catholics) who want to know more about the birth of Jesus, and the Christmas feast.
December 31, 2024
I received this book as a Christmas gift for being a Faith Formation Catechist. I would read it a while, put it down, and then come back to it.
It is a nice study and summary into the history of religious traditions surrounding Christmas, Biblical context, historical context, and trying to sort truth, myth, legend and pure fiction.
It is a nice study and summary into the history of religious traditions surrounding Christmas, Biblical context, historical context, and trying to sort truth, myth, legend and pure fiction.
December 29, 2022
I first heard of this book when my parents and I started watching the series on Formed. Not realizing that I had found the book earlier this year and had set it aside to read during Advent. It is a great book to help look deeper into the meanings of Christmas.
January 2, 2025
Great book explaining Christmas traditions. Definitely reccomend.
Covers multiple questions in a very comprehensive way and has good citations and explanations.
Will probably read another book by this author in the future...
Covers multiple questions in a very comprehensive way and has good citations and explanations.
Will probably read another book by this author in the future...
December 24, 2025
Public scholarship at its best. A great book dispelling myths and legends about the history of Christmas and offering a well-grounded study of the biblical texts and historical context for the holy day. Highly recommend.
December 5, 2022
A very difficult book to get through with all the scripture references and theological texts.
January 7, 2023
Very detailed, I was able to listen to this book on my podcast which truly helped me.
August 22, 2023
Lots of background regarding the Christmas season from a theological perspective.
November 13, 2023
Excellent and understandable history of Christmas stories and traditions.
May 1, 2024
Some things in this book I have heard of before but a lot of it were new ideas I had not heard before. A very quick read.
January 2, 2022
A good book delving into various aspects of Christmas. I'd definitely count it among (and indeed on my shelf next to) anything by Pitre or Kreeft.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews