Imagine stepping into the shadowy groves of pre-Medieval Germany, where the whisper of evergreen boughs concealed rituals that might make even the most jaded modern reader blush—yet hold the hidden roots of the world’s twinkling ‘tanenbaum’; I implore you, dear skeptic, to venture forth with an open mind, for what follows may forever compel you not to hang your ornaments.
This year, lots of people are feeling the weight of the plea from more and more believers who are rejecting X-mass, and they are parrying back with the notion that ‘Christ Mass’ is not pagan in any way. Mainstream, prominent public Christian figures are pitching it as bereft of any pagan influence. Okay. Let’s say it’s not pagan! Let’s just look at what it is…
That leaves the question: “Well, then… is it a product of ‘truth‘?” Because Yeshua said that there was coming a day when people would worship God the Father “In Spirit, and in Truth“.
So, lets first list the facts: it is called “Christ Mass”. It is thus a “mass”, a catholic observance of the ‘eucharist’. They do that every ‘sun-day’, but this one is slightly different. It is the ‘mass’ of ‘christ’ on December 25th, offered at midnight. You can watch it on television, called “Midnight Mass”. If you’ve ever watched it, often the priest is holding up the ‘baby Jesus’, and then they are all consuming the ‘eucharist’, claiming that it is the actual ‘body’ and ‘blood’ of the ‘Christ-child.’ Read into it what you will, or not; but consider, is there ever a time that a Spirit-filled believer in Yeshua [also called “Jesus”] is supposed to believe in all his heart that he is eating the flesh of a human, man or babe? No. Yeshua explained when He gave us the bread on Passover not that the Bread was His body, but the WORDS that convey His giving His body to us to save us from our sins is the focal point of our faith. [John 6:63] But, Catholics the world over say they are eating his flesh, and drinking his blood, and that those of us who disagree are ‘cursed and going to hell’. That is the very ‘spirit’ of ‘Christ Mass’. A ‘mass’ is an effective execution of the ‘Christ’, whether the Catholic sees it as a re-enactment or an actual execution. It does not belong in the framework of a “True” Worshipper of the Son of God. ‘Christ-mass’ is thus not truth. Which means, it was not given by the Spirit.
Next, let’s look at the chosen date: December 25. It is a simple and biblical fact that Yeshua was not born on December 25, regardless of opinions on other dates. The practical is, there is usually snow in Bethlehem in late December; but, even if there is not snow, because of the regular and persistent weather pattern in Israel, the grass is always dead in December. But, the scriptures tell us that Yeshua was born in Bethlehem during a time when shepherds were out tending the sheep at nighttime, keeping watch while they grazed: on what? dirt? ice? A simple study of the texts will tell the average reader that Yeshua was actually born in the fall. But ‘Christ Mass’ insists that we believe it to have been in the dead of winter. Those shepherds, why are they grazing their sheep in the snow? So, the date is wrong. Thus, the chosen date is not truth, and not given by the Spirit.
Having been born in Bethlehem in the fall, Yeshua was not born in a ‘manger’, or a pastoral lean-to, a barnlike structure. He was born in a “sukka”. The Aramaic NT, which has it’s origin all the way back to the late first and early second centuries, calls the place where he was born an אוֹריָא , an obscure Aramaic word for the Hebrew ‘sukka’ סֻכָּה. This would certainly have been a ‘tell-tale’ sign to Jewish shepherds in the fall that the Messiah was ‘dwelling’ among them, as Sukkot commemorates their dwelling in a sukka in the wilderness, with God in their midst. A ‘manger’ does not convey that message. Further, the ‘three wise men’ were not there! The “megushim” did not show up until two years later. The ‘three wise men’ was an invention of Tertullian, later exploited by a particular catholic cathedral that ‘found’ three skeletons and named them the ‘three wise men’ of Tertullian in order to entice catholic pilgrims to their cathedral so they could purchase theirs and their loved-ones’ salvation with money. The bones were originally housed in the Basilica of Sant’Eustorgio in Milan, Italy, with traditions tracing them to the 4th–6th centuries, likely brought there from Constantinople. Rainald of Dassel brought them from there to Cologne, Germany, after a conflict between the Italians and the Germans, and Cologne started the ‘legend’ of the three wise men, in order to increase their cathedral’s income. So, the ‘manger’ and the ‘three wise men’ are both romanticized fictions. The only living beings in the sukka with the infant Yeshua were Miryam, Yosef, and an unnamed number of Jewish shepherds. Thus, the sacred, customary scene is not true, and not given by the Spirit.
Putting gifts under a tree is these days purported simply to point to the gift of ‘eternal life’, since Yeshua gives us that. But, God actually forbids us to incorporate evergreen trees into our worship. [Ezekiel 6:13, Jeremiah 10:2-4, Is 44:14]. Most ancient societies held the evergreen as sacred and sought fertility through deities that compelled them to certain rites under those trees. In gratitude, rites concerning the babies conceived, often in the spring, would be held for the babies later born, many born on/around December 25. Further, Saturnalia’s Roman deity was supposed to have been born on that day, and the evergreen was associated in the worship of that deity, which is also a ‘trinity’. So, the evergreen tree is nowhere seen in scripture, and cannot be associated with the birth of the Jewish Messiah in any way. But, it can easily be associated with a host of false deities whose rites were sexual and involved evergreen trees. Early monks trying to convert Germanic tribes had troubles ending the pagan ritual of bedding down in evergreen groves for fertility, and the ‘tanenbaum’ was incorporated into “Christ Mass” for appeasement. It was, again, the German ‘tannenbaum’ that popularized the idea of the Christ Mass tree, and that was a pre-medieval, pagan custom rooted in perversion. The decorations on the trees were part of those rites as well, and are of most vile symbology. Thus, the ‘christ-mass’ tree is not true, and thus not given by the Spirit.
Last, the main character of “Christ Mass” in modernity is not “Jesus,” but “Santa Claus.” This is, again, a German contribution. The German immigrants flooding into America in the 1800s still celebrated the Christ Mass, in spite of being ‘protestant’ [Lutheran]. They had the custom of “Saint Nicholas”, a Catholic ‘saint’, who gave gifts to poor people. The German children said it funny around their English neighbors, and the English children heard “Snt Nklis”. That mispronunciation morphed into “Santa Claus”. A poem was written in 1823 describing the ‘right jolly old elf‘. [Clement Clarke Moore] This began the early lore of an elf, a pagan, mythical creature that appears at “Christ Mass”. Then, a little later, Thomas Nast drew a picture of his rendition of the elf in “Harper’s Weekly”, making him rounder and fuller, creating the North Pole workshop, and giving him the red suit. This version of “Saint Nick”-turned-“Santa Claus” started gaining popularity in the late 1800s, with American-born protestant children not getting gifts at that time, envious of their Catholic and Lutheran peers. So, a little girl named Virginia asked her father, “Is there really a ‘Santa Claus’?”, who responded, “If it’s in The Sun, it’s true”. The little girl wrote a letter to the New York newspaper, The Sun, and a reporter responded, “He exists as certainly as love and generosity”, which is not true! Coca Cola popularized the elf and marketed “Santa Claus”, and American, Christian parents gave in to the pressure of celebrating a ‘magic elf‘ who now holds deified qualities: sees you when you’re sleeping/omnipresence; knows when you’re awake/omniscience. Only God has that capacity. Rewards for being good… withholds for being bad/righteous judgment. Children write letters to “Santa” as a petition akin to prayer. The whole world lies about his journey around the world on television these days to keep the ruse up. None of this is true, thus, it is not given by the Spirit.
These are the core elements of “Christ Mass”. Not one of them is rooted in truth. We do not eat the flesh and blood of the ‘christ child’ at any time, but “christmas” is originally a catholic ‘mass’ to celebrate the birth of the baby Jesus, and consume the eucharist, a spiritually canabalistic ritual of an infant child. Yeshua was not born in the dead of winter, but in the fall during a High Holy Feast of the Bible, called “Sukkot”, which is known as “The Season of Our Joy,” and as a time of commemorating and predicting “The Word” dwelling “with us”. He was not born in a pastoral barn, but in a Sukka, a temporary house built by all Jews during Sukkot, where traveling guests were invited to live in all the villages around Jerusalem, because they had to be there for the feast [thus the overcrowding]. We are explicitly commanded not to participate in the pagan sexual rites of evergreen groves of the whole ancient world, still practiced in Germanic tribes as they were becoming Catholic. The evergreen and its decorations are grotesque symbols of fertility. We are not to believe in ‘magic’ as believers, nor to ‘call on’ or ‘trust in’ anyone but The Creator for the blessings of heaven, yet the whole world, not just ‘christianty’, petitions Santa Claus to visit them and bestow blessings upon them. All of society participates in perpetuating the ruse, convincing children of his existence, bribing them for good behavior, encouraging them to ‘ask’ him for their gifts, bringing them to adore him and sit in his lap [commemorating Molekh], knowing all the while he does not exist. Look into Krampas, the other ‘Santa Claus’ of Germanic origin. That is who is actually the ‘man behind the mask.’ None of these things are true, and the reader knows it. Thus, since the Ru’akh HaElohim, the Spirit of God, is also called “The Spirit of Truth”, then God’s Spirit is not behind any of these core customs of this ‘holiday’, which is no Holy Day at all.
There is truth in Khanukah, however. Yeshua was conceived during Khanukah, and born at Sukkot. Yeshua preached about the coming false Messiah, a false shepherd, during Khanukah [John 10]. The story of Khanukah is proven history, and is all about deliverance from being forced into mixture religion by a false, pagan king who declared himself to be ‘god’ and defiled the Temple of God. We commemorate ‘Light’, the relighting of the Menorah in the Temple of God after Jews had been forbidden by a false god to worship the True God in His House. Yeshua IS the Light of the World, which is a custom of Sukkot. Khanukah was an ’emergency Sukkot’, to rededicate God’s Temple and restart the worship of the Creator. It inspired Jews to throw off the pagan customs of Greece and Rome, and to cherish God. Yeshua was conceived during Khanukah, which occurs during this season, and it is His conception that is the actual miracle of His birth. He was born after the manner of all men, through the birth canal. But, He was conceived by God through the Ru’akh, the power of God, in the virgin Miryam, making Him the Son of God, pre-existant, eternal, yet now flesh, and different than every other human being. He is not a myth; Santa is.
So, consider whether or not you really are worshipping God through His Son in any truth given by His Spirit, or not. You choose, today, whom you will serve.
“But the time is coming, and it is here, when the true worshippers shall worship The Father in Spirit and Truth; for The Father also desires worshippers such as these. For God is Spirit; and those who worship Him must worship Him in Spirit and Truth.”
Rebutting anti-Semitic Khanukah diatribes:
Khanukah is historically grounded, not theologically invented.
It commemorates the desecration of the Jerusalem Temple by Antiochus IV Epiphanes (167 BCE), the Maccabean revolt, and the rededication of the sanctuary. These events are well-attested in Second Temple literature (1–2 Maccabees, Josephus) and form essential background to late Second Temple Judaism—the very world of Yeshua and the Apostles.
Yeshua Himself taught publicly during Khanukah—the Feast of Dedication (John 10:22–23). He neither condemned the observance nor distanced Himself from it. On the contrary, He used that setting to address issues of identity, authority, and false messianic claims—precisely the theological crisis provoked by Antiochus, who functioned as a prototype of a false messiah.
Archaeology confirms Khanukah-era lighting practices.
Oil lamps dating to the Second Temple period—many resembling what people today casually call “Aladdin-style” lamps—have been excavated throughout Judea. These were ordinary, utilitarian vessels used for domestic and ritual light. Their existence reinforces that lighting oil lamps was a normal, historically embedded practice in the period, not a later medieval invention or mystical innovation.
Lighting a Khanukiah is commemorative, not cultic.
No worship is directed toward the lamp, the oil, or the light. It functions as a historical memorial—analogous to standing stones, memorial feasts, or written remembrances found throughout Scripture. Such acts preserve memory; they do not create doctrine.
Regarding the oil:
We do not observe Khanukah because we are required to affirm a supernatural extension of oil. The historically uncontested fact is that oil was present at all after occupation, desecration, and warfare—sufficient to rekindle Temple service until proper oil could be prepared. Whether one understands that as miraculous or providential does not alter the historical significance of restored worship.
Observing Khanukah adds no commandments and replaces no biblical feasts.
It remembers resistance to forced idolatry, rejection of a counterfeit messiah, and the restoration of a defiled sanctuary—themes fully consistent with, and ultimately fulfilled in, Yeshua.
To dismiss Khanukah as “unbiblical” is not a defense of Scripture.
It is a rejection of Second Temple history, the cultural context of the New Testament, and the very setting in which Yeshua chose to teach.
You are free not to observe it.
But condemning those who do—especially while erasing its Jewish historical context—reflects theological ignorance at best, and something far more troubling at worst.