We all know that the number one alternative candidate (other than Osama bin Laden) for the 9/11 attack was the state of Israel. This is why Israel is the "keystone" of both Qanon and freemasonry (Joe Lange has good writing on Israel as the keystone).
A few weeks ago I learned that there are strong arguments that Jesus was born on September 11, 3 BC. The classic book is by Ernest Martin and was written in 1991, long before the terror attack.
So my natural question is:
Did Israel attack on September 11 in part because its leaders believed that Jesus was born on September 11?
And, since Jesus is associated with goodness and turning the other cheek, would this be a reason why many or most of the deaths on 9/11 were faked, as argued by Miles Mathis?
A related question is: if orthodox Christianity was created, in part, to hide important truths about Jesus, then would the Julian and/or Gregorian calendar (with all of its apparent shortcomings) be designed in part to hide Jesus' birthday on September 11?
Plus, there's the whole symbolism of the "light of the world" coming in at the darkest time of the year.
I trust Christian Tradition way way more than the "latest findings" and various other speculative research of modern times: I am metaphysically certain that Jesus was born in December.
A primary reason for the mainstream church tradition is the good Eastern Christian tradition that Jesus was baptized on January 6 (in Tybi), and this celebration was connected to his birth very early, thus giving rise to the later 4th-century published date of December 25.
However, earlier evidence for December 25 itself is conflicting, with manuscripts of Hippolytus varying among themselves, and with Clement of Alexandria being unhelpful as usual. Clement's Stromata has Christ's birth as 194 years, 1 month, 13 days before the death of Commodus (31 Dec 193 AD), implying mid-November of 2 BC. Hippolytus's Canon has Jesus's genesis on 2 April of 2 BC, though "genesis" may mean either birth or conception. So the author seems to support a backdating, using Hippolytus's other statements, to conception around 25 March of 4 BC, birth 25 December of 4 BC, which is not too far off from my preferred date of birth 6 October of 4 BC.
This source has rawer data than I've seen and so it's worth pursuit, and it also doesn't do a severe injustice to the concerns I've raised before, so being open-minded I'll need to look more into it. One difficulty is the shepherds in the field and the other non-winter activities of the narrative; another is the timing of John's birth to accord with the Levitical cycles governing Zechariah's service. So I appreciate your goading me to look into this and find more to the story, and I'll keep these traditions in mind moving forward. If I do need to make changes to account for everything I've seen, I'll publish that; but for now there's not sufficient data to overturn my initial presumptions.