Dear Editor,

If we take it for granted that the day on which Jesus was born is actually December 25, and that he desires that day to be remembered and celebrated, wouldn’t such a celebration run counter to the reason why he came in the first place, which was to save mankind from sin and death and not to retreat to his childhood years?

For example, Isaiah 9:6 prophesied of the messiah: “For a child has been born to us, a son has been given to us; and the rulership will rest on his shoulder. His name will be called Wonderful Councilor, mighty God, eternal father, prince of peace. To the increase of his rulership and to peace there will be no end…”

Seems quite a huge task for a child, doesn’t it?

In fact, it’s hardly likely that any of us, attempting to prove our current identity, would proudly reach for a photograph from our childhood years unless to prove how cute we once looked.

Again, consider Luke 4:18-19: “The sprit of the Lord is upon me to proclaim good news to to poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to captives and a recovery of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are crushed.. and to preach his acceptable year of goodwill.”

Sounds like a role designed for a baby? Not even the politicians vying for office, if asked to present their credentials, would think a video clip from their crib days would bolster an impressive resume.

The fascination with infancy obviously distorts why a person is born — which is for a reason, a purpose, and not so much to nurture in perpituatal infancy.

As babies, we may have relished when friends and neighbours come around pinching our rosy cheek and doing baby talks with expressions such as “Cutie-cutie-cutie-cutie?” Or, “What a pickney cute!” But, in relation to Jesus, the messiah, a baby’s category is clearly inappropriate

Homer Sylvester

Elmsford, New York, USA

h2sylvester@gmail.com