Teacher sparks Christmas debate by denying Jesus's historicity

The teacher who denied Jesus's birth at Christmas

A high school teacher openly stated what many keep silent about: that Jesus's birth "is not a historical fact, it cannot be recorded." He wrote this in response to the holiday greeting from his regional Education Minister, which he found "ridiculous" coming from such an official. The response was an explosion that, nearly three years later, has accumulated hundreds of messages and shows no signs of dying down.

The discussion has covered almost everything: philology, archaeology, theology, politics, and—inevitably—December pay. Nihil novi sub sole.

Did Jesus exist? What sources say

The core issue is a perennial question: is there proof that Jesus existed? The dominant answer is nuanced. His existence as a historical figure is widely accepted, according to most scholars; however, the account of miracles belongs to the realm of faith.

The cited testimonies are not contemporary. Tacitus's Annals, from the second century, mention Jesus in Book 15, Chapter 44, placing him as executed by order of Pontius Pilate. Suetonius's Life of Claudius, also from the second century, describes him in Chapter 25 as a magician put to death by Pilate. Pliny the Younger's letter to Trajan refers to Christians who worshipped a man named Christ crucified.

Against this weighs a repeated argument: there is no strictly contemporary reference, and the passage by Flavius Josephus is likely much later and probably an interpolation. This is compounded by the noise surrounding the dating of the Gospels: some studies place Mark in the 30s or between 35 and 45, while other readings delay it to the 50s, 60s, or 70s.

Christmas celebrated on December 25

Another front is the date. Many messages note that Christmas falls on the winter solstice, when the sun is reborn after the longest night, and that pagan cults like Mithras or Sol Invictus already existed. The conclusion drawn is that the Christian festival overlapped with pagan celebrations.

The counterargument does not deny the calendar but disputes the corollary. That the choice of day responds to political or Roman tradition criteria does not make Christmas into something else, as the reply suggests. Comparing it to Japanese people eating mochis while Spaniards eat turrón proves nothing.

The message versus the myth

Here the exchange becomes philosophical. The underlying thesis is that the figure cannot be separated from the message: who composed the parables of the Good Samaritan, the Prodigal Son, or the poor widow if there was no author? The question is posed as a problem of forgery: passing off work as Beethoven's requires being as good as Beethoven.

Opposing this is the reading that sees the words attributed to Jesus as a product of his time and subsequent oral transmission, which added supernatural layers to an original message of liberation. A third path exists: the pagan solstice festival on one side, and the first-century Jewish preacher on the other, with neither explaining the other.

Spartacus, kings, and the uncomfortable comparison

One of the most curious derivations leads to Spartacus. It is argued that he was crucified for refusing to be a slave, did not claim to be a god, and perhaps deserved more commemoration than Christ himself. The rebuttal is that the messages are not comparable: one turned the other cheek and his disciples claimed he resurrected; the other was simply not naive.

From theology to double pay

As the matter entangles, the conversation ends where these debates usually do: in the pocket. Some demand that the teacher, if he believes there is nothing to celebrate, renounce his school holidays and his extra December pay. "Why don't you renounce double pay and the holidays?" summarizes the stance.

The story's closing is not in theology but in the calendar. Until 1582, the ab urbe condita dating was used; the count that today gives name to the years, counted from a disputed birth, is a later convention. Two millennia of history are ordered from a date that remains without consensus. And even those who deny the character need to name him to deny him.