The only problem I have with that is that Christmas Day was 'selected' for the celebration of Jesus' birth only because the date coincided with start of the Roman celebration of Saturnalia, the extra six days left over in the Roman Calendar. There is zero evidence that Jesus was born onDecember 25th. It was convenient, it could be hidden among the pagan holidays of Saturnalia, and it was available. It was not an important date in the early church, while Easter was by far more important. The dead of Winter was not a time in which the flocks would be in the fields, but would have been kept in at night. It does not a good time to have people traveling to "enroll" for a census. It is much more likely to have been in the Spring after sowing seed, or alternately in the fall, just before harvest.
In any case, it's pretty well established that December 25th as Christmas was a 4th Century creation of the Roman Empire to popularize Christianity.
If the suggestion were correct, one would expect to find at least a single reference by early Christians to support it. Instead we find scores of quotations from Church Fathers indicating a desire to distance themselves from pagan religions.
Although the date of Christ’s birth is not given to us in Scripture, there is documented evidence that December 25 was already of some significance to Christians prior to A.D. 354. One example can be found in the writings of Hyppolytus of Rome, who explains in his Commentary on the book of Daniel (c. A.D. 204) that the Lord’s birth was believed to have occurred on that day:
For the first advent of our Lord in the flesh, when he was born in Bethlehem, was December 25th, Wednesday, while Augustus was in his forty-second year, but from Adam, five thousand and five hundred years. He suffered in the thirty-third year, March 25th, Friday, the eighteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, while Rufus and Roubellion were Consuls.