Indy-Guy. I mis-typed my response. A human ruler moved holidays around to combine Roman (Pagan) and Christmas ideals around so he could meld them together. I thought it also coincided with his (the ruler) birth date, but I was incorrect on that part.
If you do research, it's VERY easy to see that christmas did not originate with Christ or his birth (I am a Christian). I don't think there is a Christian religion that thinks it does. I think they all agree on the Pagan origins.
Now, you would think that if it were important for Christians to celebrate the birth of Jesus, we'd have that direction in the bible. Instead, he tells us to commemorate his death, but never his birth. Ever read about Jesus or one of his followers attending his (or any) birthday celebration in the bible? Me either.
Christ’s birth date is not known. Never mentioned in the bible. The gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) do not indicate the day or the month of his birth, but based on the events (flocks in the field at night, among others), it is believed that Jesus was born in the fall, not winter.
According to a widely accepted hypothesis, the birth of Christ was assigned the date of the winter solstice (December 25 in the Julian Calendar, January 6 in the Egyptian), because this is the day the sun begins returning to northern skies. The pagan devotees of Mithra celebrated the dies natalis Solis Invicti (birthday of the invincible sun). On Dec. 25, 274, Aurelian had proclaimed the sun-god principal patron of the empire and dedicated a temple to him in the Campus Martius. Christmas originated at a time when the cult of the sun was particularly strong at Rome. The Catholics wanted in on this. It was Pope Julius that officially sanctioned Dec. 25th (Pagan Saturnalia) as Christ' birthday because he thought if he blended the two faiths (Paganism and Christianity, something the bible condemns at Ex. 20:5, Deut. 12:32) he would gain converts. That is where the christmas tree, mistletoe-holly, and the lights come from (originally candles).
M’Clintock and Strong’s Cyclopœdia says: “The observance of Christmas is not of divine appointment, nor is it of N[ew] T[estament] origin. The day of Christ’s birth cannot be ascertained from the N[ew] T[estament], or, indeed, from any other source.”
I could go on, but I'm not trying to change anyone here. I did want to clarify my mis-type earlier. In no way was I meaning that Christ moved anything around to coincide with his birth.