The primary message of Jesus was love and social inclusion. This is clear from the traditions recorded in the various gospels.
Accordingly there is a contrast between this message and that of the "Christian" churches which preach in his name.
The word Greek-based term "Christ" was probably unknown to the historical Jesus. To call him such turns him from a historical figure into a theological event.
And, by doing so, love and social inclusion are replaced by an arrogance of religious certainty.
There was no historical inevitability that Jesus of Nazareth would be transformed into "Jesus Christ"; indeed, there was no reason why the traditions of his life would be written down at all.
The early history of the Christian church is a series of contingencies which could have gone in any direction, or no direction at all.
But each move does seem to me to have sadly taken those involved further from the ethical traditions of Jesus of Nazareth.
For me, "Christian" churches are not primarily concerned with love and social inclusion, but with asserting and imposing "truth". And, for me, that is where all the bad things about Christianity come from.
For Christian "truth" is not one that cannot be tested, challenged or verified, but one which provides the grounds for inflicting hate and social exclusion.
So I will be celebrating the birth of Jesus and not the birth of "Christ".